On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 17:58 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:It's really just a represent the community type of role. The LF uses the TAB to get a sense of the community for various things they and their members are thinking. Conversely, the TAB was initially formed to get a set of specific objectives out of the then OSDL (Doc Fellowship, Travel Fund, NDA programme and HW lending library plus a few other things). The TAB takes proposals from the community for things it needs that require an organisation to sort out (a good example of this is the currently being acted on PCI sig membership, which will give us access to the PCI specs plus a vendor ID that the virtualisation people asked for to help with virtual device recognition). The procedure is to read statements before the election in a BOF at the Kernel Summit, so the order is statements first then voting. The base requirement is just someone you trust to look after the interests of the community and correctly reflect them back to the LF. I think someone who had concrete proposals to make the LF better or to come up with new ways it could help the community would be on to a winner ... but then I'm a bit naïve when it comes to trusting democracy. James -
| Arnd Bergmann | Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures |
| Andrew Morton | 2.6.23-rc1-mm2 |
| Nick Piggin | [patch 3/6] mm: fix fault vs invalidate race for linear mappings |
| KOSAKI Motohiro | [bug?] tg3: Failed to load firmware "tigon/tg3_tso.bin" |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Herbert Xu | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| David Miller | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
