As discussed at the restaurant meeting at BSDCan.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rD FreeBSD doc repository - subversion
- Lint
No Lint Coverage - Unit
No Test Coverage
Event Timeline
Change "should appoint" to "must appoint" It may not happen but we want the stick.
Other than that, I approve.
internal/hats.xml | ||
---|---|---|
55–63 | I think we should be a bit stronger in encouraging people to rotate through. We should have some guidance as to under what conditions a role-holder would continue -- as written it seems odd to suggest the limit is two terms, but there's no limit. Maybe we just add "in exceptional circumstances" or such?
|
internal/hats.xml | ||
---|---|---|
36 | This "they" is a bit difficult to understand for me. Does this mean a group of individuals on the active? An individual may serve if core approves the hat. And he may keep working as long as he is willing to continue and core does not oppose it. So I think approval by core should come first in the bullet list, and then continuation conditions do. The descriptions after the list are in this order. |
internal/hats.xml | ||
---|---|---|
36 | 'They' in this case refers to the individual mentioned in the previous paragraph. It's pretty standard English. The point about re-ordering the items is well put though and I'll certainly re-order as you suggest -- but when I do so "They" will become ambiguous (Core or the Individual?) so I guess I'll address your first point as well. |
internal/hats.xml | ||
---|---|---|
36 | I guess singular they is perhaps confusing to non-native speakers. "The appointment" might work here, although maybe not relevant with a broader change. |
Comments from Peter:
- Simplify the mapping of hat terms to core terms.
- Distinguish between volunteers and paid staff.
s/a/the/ in a few places and note that a core term is two years.
I think this is ready to commit. If you have any last comments please add them soon. Otherwise I'll commit in a day or so's time.