Here's the second draft of the charter.
Thanks, Josh! Overall it looks pretty good to me -
I have put some comments below.
The FESCo liaison is always a member of the decision making group
for
the Work Group. The liaison is responsible for presenting the WG
decisions and summary of WG discussions to FESCo on a regular basis.
They will also take feedback or requirements from FESCo back to the
WG. The liaison is not required to be a FESCo member, but should be
able to regularly attend the FESCo meetings.
good
Members of the Work Group are chosen by the Work Group as seats
become
available. In the event that a current member relinquishes their
seat, the Work Group will fill the seat by selecting a candidate and
approving by majority consensus. Eligible candidates must be in the
FPCA+1 group. The Work Group is highly encouraged to seek out
candidates that have been showing persistent and high quality
contribution to the Workstation product.
Basically looks okay to me.
What does the "+1" mean here though? Is "FPCA Group" sufficient?
However some Red Hatters are in the Red Hat Employee CLA group instead.
For bigger issues, where there may be disagreement, or where there
is
long-term impact, or where an action may not easily be undone, we
will put forth a formal proposal on the mailing list with a
"[Proposal for Vote] header in the email Subject: field. Working
group members can vote +1 to approve, -1 to disagree, or 0 to abstain;
five +1 votes are necessary for a measure to pass.
Should a timeframe for voting be mentioned? Within one week?
In the event that a live meeting is held in IRC to discuss an issue,
proposals will be done in much the same way. A member will put forth
an official proposal by prefixing a summary of such with "Proposal:"
and WG members will vote as above. Results will be recorded and
posted in any meeting minutes.
Sounds reasonable
(NOTE: I chose option #2 from the previous draft for now. If
you'd
like to see something different, please speak up. I don't believe
anyone commented on this section specifically.)
Not sure which would be more effective and practical.
If we are not going to have a WG mailing-list
then perhaps a trac instance would be good idea
and help to separate WG business from general desktop discussion?
Do we have a wiki space yet?
Thanks, Jens