[Foundation] membership, money, and meritocracy
Peter G. Millard
me at pgmillard.com
Sat Apr 5 09:46:44 CST 2003
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Meijer" <jabberfoundation at ralphm.ik.nu>
> On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 02:10:25AM +0200, johannes.wagener at gmx.net wrote:
> > I hope you agree that the people in the group that writes jabber related
code are the
> > same people that bring in JEP (just because why should some non jabber
> > have the idea to make a JEP???)... and in addition to that they are the
people that have
> > the neccessary experience in jabber to be able to judge a JEP.
> > I am sorry, that the development of my client is not as fast as the one
of others. That is
> > because of my lag of time of course... I am still implementing my todo
list that holds
> > mainly the current existing JEPs. Whatever I think I have the skills to
judge a JEP.
> > Thus I think esspecially the people that write jabber related code
should have a free
> > oportunity to judge about other JEPs. And this is the JSF i think.
> As it stands now, the JSF membership does NOT decide on the acceptance of
> This is done by the Jabber Council. The Standards JIG is the place to
> protocols, but this list is not for JSF members only. Everyone can voice
> opinion on the various proposals, and everyone's voice carries the same
> there, member or non-member.
> Changing the JSF structure so that the members of the JSF all belong to
> doesn't change this, at all.
Exactly - The current state of affairs means that ANYONE that participates
in the Jabber Community is able to 'voice' their opinions on JEP's via the
standards-jig mailing list. This is (and should continue to be) a completely
public list which anyone can join. Being a member of the JSF right now has
absolutely NO bearing on what JEP's get passed. Anyone in the community can
author a JEP. Anyone can join the mailing list to participate in discussions
about JEPs. Only the Council "passes" JEPs so that they become "standard"
More information about the Members