Re: Technical committee workflow

[Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>]

Hi,

thanks for your proposal, sounds good to me.

* Ian Jackson (ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk) [081231 18:20]:
>  * When an issue comes in, the first TC member to get to it and claim
>    it becomes primarily responsible for it.  We'll call them the
>    Rapporteur.
> 
>  * The Rapporteur discusses the issue - off the main TC list - with
>    the various parties.  debian-devel might be a good place, with
>    an initial CC to other lists and the bug of course.  Other TC
>    members could participate there if they had time available.
>    Other Developers could show their usefulness as future TC
>    candidates by their contributions to these discussions.

I'd like to see the discussion either on list or in the relevant bug
report(s) so that other people can follow the discussion if needed. (Or
re-read it, or whatever.)

I'd also like a provision that allows the tech ctte to reassign the issue
to another member if wanted (not that I expect that to happen, but
anyways).


>  * If the parties are not satisfied with the Rapporteur's opinion,
>    the Rapporteur would come back to the whole committee and present
>    their report.  Obviously this involves discussing the matter again
>    but now we will have one person whose clear role it is to drive the
>    process.

I'd like us to have something like "at least one TC member needs to agree
within <timeframe> that we need further discussion, or the tech ctte voted
as the Rapporteurs report is".

With the current constitution rules, I fear we cannot set that as a formal
policy, but we can agree within us that in case none of the members
considers it necessary to discuss, we'll just vote about the
recommendations and follow them, and be done with it.



Cheers,
Andi