[yocto-ab] YP Participant: Silica

[Osier-mixon, Jeffrey]

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 13:30 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>
>> Right but in this case it'd be a YP User, not a YP Participant.
>
> We have two classifications. A "YP Participant" is someone who is making
> use of the project in some way (thereby 'participating'). Its designed
> to be easy to get and I believe if someone is sharing YP built images,
> that qualifies. If we have zero evidence of "participation" then the AB
> can deny the request however its meant to be easy to get and in this
> case there is evidence.
>
> The other classification, "YP Compatible" is much harder to get by
> design. Its these requests which need to be more carefully vetted.

Richard is quite correct. When we set up this system in summer 2012,
we have purposefully lowered the bar for YP Participant in order to
enable people to achieve it without much effort, and we have only
denied four or five requests that were clearly not participating at
any level. We have not defined "presentation" nor did we set any
restrictions on what that might mean in the form questions, preferring
instead for the Advisory Board to evaluate each applicant. Since
Silica are heavy users who are signaling a desire to participate more
publicly in the project, they fit with the kind of organization to
whom we have historically given this designation.

We discussed this at the AB meeting just now and determined that a
third designation like "YP User" would not be desirable for a number
of reasons, though we may choose to change the form questions and
thereby change people's expectations. Until we do that, though, I
would strongly recommend voting yes for Silica and any other similar
organization, as they fit with both the expectations stated on the
form and the internal desires of the program.