Re: Maximum term for tech ctte members
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 08:34:28AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I think rotation is a good idea. My main minor concern is that it
> doesn't allow reappointing members to the CTTE if there are no
> nominees whom the DPL and CTTE finds acceptable (or even if there are no
> nominees at all).
In that event the ctte would have 6 people rather than 8 for 12 months,
at which point the two expirees could be reappointed. (Though another
2 might expire then, keeping it at 6 members)
> Not allowing people to be reappointed if there are nominees and they're
> just not acceptable may be a design goal, but not allowing reappointment
> if there are no nominees does not.
I could easily see "acceptability" being defined so that automatic
reappointment is a matter of course ("they're the most experienced
candidates!", "we know them and trust them!"). Avoiding reappointmnet
as a matter of course is a design goal.
For more generous definitions of acceptability ("really smart", "knows
lots about Debian", "willing to work in a team", "can deal well with
disagreements"), I don't think there's a shortage of potential candidates
in Debian, so on that score I don't think it's likely there won't be
sufficient acceptable nominees. YMMV, of course. (And maybe "willing
to put up with the conflict and BS that makes its way to the tech ctte"
would narrow the field more).
Cheers,
aj
Reply to: