I have to agree with Doug here. I'll apply two things from the Agile
Manifesto here:
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools.
Responding to change over following a plan.
A third could apply as well:
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation.
I also do think that it's important that we be willing to discuss and
voice opinions though when we think the group needs to make sure we are
doing what is in the best interest of the community. The process and
procedures should be used more as guidelines instead of hard fast
rules. Which to say, while I value the "process and guidelines" I
value more the Collaboration aspect that an individual nominee brings
to the architecture council to help get things done.
Dave
On 03/26/2010 10:56 PM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
+1
I care less about the published criteria and more about the
council getting things done in the large, where the need is most. We
have some serious issues that we need to deal with that no one else
will, especially with the introduction of e4/Eclipse 4.0 and how to
build this crazy thing. Having Kim on the council will facilitate that
discussion and represent the most critical piece of that puzzle.
I would like to nominate Kim Moir to the Architecture Council.
She has been the force behind ensuring Eclipse builds and ships on
time. Her background in what it takes to ship Eclipse will be an asset
to the council as we face the challenges of an expanding ecosystem.
The more projects we get, the more complex the release engineering
gets. I believe she will have a positive impact on improving the state
of release engineering at Eclipse.
So, +1 from me
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal
to the Eclipse Foundation. To be permanently removed from this list,
you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.
