Just to point out a few things here, first off there is no guideline
that states a company affiliation should have anything to do with the
decision on voting somebody as core. I have ABSOLUTELY NO concern about
representation of company affiliation what so ever.
Quite frankly I wouldn't mind if there were 20 core members from HP, if
they're all actively engaged and participating then that's great. I
don't think there has been ANY incidence of folks exerting inappropriate
influence based on their affiliated interest, and if there ever was I
think it would be easy to identify and address.
As far as "don't need more" I don't agree with that either, if there are
folks contributing and doing the work then there's no reason not to add
them. Cinder IMO does NOT have an excess of reviewers by a very very
long stretch.
The criteria here should be review consistency and quality as well as
knowledge of the project, nothing more nothing less. If there's an
objection to the individuals participation or contribution that's fine,
but company affiliation should have no bearing.
