On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 11:59:07PM +0100, Richard Hartmann wrote: > > still have mixed feelings about the provision that allows "younger" > > ctte members to step down, inhibiting the expiry of "older" members. > > I'm not necessarily against that, but I'm struggling to understanding > > its rationale. > > > > Antony: can you remind us what the rationale is? > Yes, please. I've briefly discussed this off list with Sam Hartman, who proposed a sensible rationale (although not necessarily the same Antony had in mind). The rationale is avoiding suddenly under staffing the ctte too much, making it non functional. I understand the concern, but I think it could be addressed better. For instance, one could say that expiries of "young" members inhibit the expiry of an "old" member only if the latter expiry would reduce the size of the ctte below 4 members (which is some sort of minimally viable threshold for a function ctte, according to Constitution §6.2.1). In all other situations, "old" member expiries proceed unaffected by how many other members of the ctte stepped down in the previous year. I think the above would be a good compromise, although I haven't took the time to properly formalize it yet (so I might have overlooked nasty corner cases). Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature