Re: Maximum term for tech ctte members
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 9:16 PM, Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote:
>>>>>> "Don" == Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> writes:
>
> >> Personally, I agree that having multiple active discussion/second
> >> periods on debian-vote is problematic.
>
> Don> Right; that's what we seemed to agree on as well.
>
> Don> I think that we can all agree that we'd like a decision on this
> Don> amendment significantly before January 1st, which presumably
> Don> means having it formally proposed well before December 3rd.
>
> OK. So there is some time pressure.
> I personally don't see any problem with that going on while the CFV for
> the previous resolution is in place.
> So, I think my comment about acting in a week or so seems about right.
>
> I'd find arguments of the form "I personally would find it confusing/bad
> to have both going on because ..." more compelling than arguments of
> the form "it would generally be confusing/bad." What I'm saying is that
> I'd be a lot more sympathetic to delay more than a week or so if people
> come forward and say they personally would like to delay more than if
> they say that some nebulous we/it would be a good idea to delay more.
>
>
> --Sam
I'll say that I agree with the TC members who have spoken up.. I am a
subscriber to -vote, and am still trying to sort out how I'm going to
vote, but I am just burnt from all the email traffic.
Starting another GR process right now, would almost definitely push me
into that camp of DDs that tends to ignores voting.
IMHO, the lists definitely do need a cool down period, and am grateful
the TC members aren't pushing this right now.
-Brian
Reply to: