Task of the HP steering committee

[Duncan Coutts]

[ Resending to the list, for some reason the cc was to @community.h.o ]

On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:57 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:

> So what I really want us to discuss is what we will present to the
> libraries list. What questions are we going to ask them and in what
> order.
> 
> Do we start with a suggestion, or rough outline, like Don's proposal
> above?


So far we've not got too far. :-)  Perhaps something more concrete.


How about we propose to the libs list a specific framework for new
packages and leave some variables for discussion. For example we can
say:

--------------------

Process for adding new packages

The period for proposal and discussion for new packages opens after a
major release and closes two months before the next major release.
Maintainers propose their own packages, providing their own assessment
against a set of criteria. This is done by opening a ticket in the
platform trac (using a template) and posting a summary to the libraries
mailing list for an open discussion.

To prevent problems with managing too quick growth, we would expect
roughly 5 new packages to be accepted in each major release.

--------------------

Then the variable bit that we want everyone to argue over is exactly
what those criteria should be. We can propose a set of uncontroversial
ones. We can also propose a set of more controversial ones with a range
of options. The more controversial we think these are, the more we
should split things up into separate focused discussions.

So, can we try and improve the text of the general framework above and
come up with lists of easy uncontroversial criteria, and more
controversial criteria. Then we can batch them up and start the
discussions on the libs list.

Sound like a plan?

Duncan