Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 24, 2023. It is now read-only.

Clarify that we mean strategic members that participate in the working group #5

Closed
waynebeaton opened this issue Feb 21, 2019 · 1 comment

Comments

@waynebeaton
Copy link
Contributor

The statements regarding votes of the "strategic members" need to be qualified.

e.g.

Super-majority, including a Super-majority of Strategic Members, is required to approve a Profile Specification.

The intention is that we get a Super-majority of the Strategic Members of the Working Group (not all Eclipse Foundation Strategic Members)

@waynebeaton
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have clarified in three places in the document that we mean "Strategic Members of the Working Group". Note that the Working Group's charter defines "Strategic Member" in the context of the Working Group.

Commit e44563a

@waynebeaton waynebeaton mentioned this issue Feb 25, 2019
waynebeaton added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 4, 2019
Per Issue #5, all artifacts related to a vote must be delivered in distribution form to the Specification Committee prior to the start of the vote, must not change during the voting period, and must persist in the delivered form following the vote as part of the public record. If related artifacts are modified while a vote is in progress, the vote is declared invalid and the corresponding review (if any) is declared failed.
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant