-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Mon 28 Oct 2013 08:58:03 AM EDT, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2013-10-28 at 08:55 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>
> The first goal of the Working Group process is to plan our
> governance process for future members of the Server Working
> Group. I think the place we should start is by gathering a list
> of requirements that a governance charter will need to keep in
> mind. I'll list my thoughts below, please raise your own concerns
> as well.
>
> In no particular order (stream of consciousness):
>
> == Voting Members == * Number of voting members for the Working
> Group. * How long a term do the voting members serve? * Should
> there be term limits or mandatory breaks? * Should there be
> reserved chairs for specific constituencies (e.g. QA,
> Ambassadors, Release Engineering)? * Voting method?[1] * Who can
> vote?[2] * Recalls?
>
> == Charter == * How do we approve the initial charter?[3] * How
> do we later amend the charter?[4]
>
>
> == My initial thoughts == I am open to counter-arguments,
> naturally.
>
> [1] For simplicity, I suspect we want to stick with range-voting
> as in the other elections. We already have the tools for this.
+1
> [2] I recommend we stick with FPCA+1 as a rule for voting.
I am not sure what FPCA+1 is, half + 1 ? If so +1
FPCA+1 means "Must be a member of at least one FAS group besides
"fpca" (which means you signed the Fedora Project Contributor
Agreement). It's a balance between allowing anyone to vote vs.
contributors (which includes QA, ambassadors, doc writers etc.).
> [3] For the initial charter, I think if it's not unanimous,
we
> need to keep talking.
+1
> [4] I think amendments should require "voting members - 1". It
> shouldn't be possible for a single dissenting vote to hold things
> up (they should get to have their say), but otherwise I think
> that a near-unanimous vote should be required to change the
> fundamental guiding document.
I should clarify that this stance is contingent upon a fixed voting
membership size. If we decided on a charter that says "Anyone who
shows up at a meeting can vote", then this won't work.
+1
Simo.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -
http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlJuYYYACgkQeiVVYja6o6MT3gCfSMVTWuAAm8ge2KfKtUoMoF4S
gMIAn00RfxM21pJtO0ScHVTAqXd32uIA
=liws
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----