Bug#727708: init system decision timetable
I think we need to set a timetable and a process that we can adhere
to, so that the process doesn't drag on indefinitely but so that
no-one is caught by surprise. We have aborted this twice and I don't
want to do it a third time. The solution to procedural cockup is
So, I think the right process is this:
* We set a date which is the earliest point at which a vote may be
* Some TC member formally proposes some set of L options. This
should be the staunchest proponent of L, which I think is probably
me. That starts the constitutional discussion period.
(The U-D-V-O options are simple enough that we can just put them
all on and we don't have to argue about the wording.)
* Some TC member in favour of T formally proposes a set of T options.
(It is necessary for this to be a proponent of T, so that suggested
amendments which allegedly improve T are judged, and accepted or
not, by a proponent of T, not by me.)
As Russ is probably the staunchest proponent of T I suggest that he
should take on this role.
* TC member(s) who think the resolution can be improved, or does not
represent their views, work to try to find better wording. That
might include talking to people on IRC to sound them out, or a
formal meeting such as Don proposes.
* TC member(s) who think that they have wording that needs to be on
the ballot formally propose it by 24h before the earliest CFV date.
* 24h before the earliest CFV date, someone (I'm volunteering) will
prepare a draft ballot representing all of the proposals,
amendments etc. and make a Last Call. During the following 24h
objections will be limited to the question of whether the draft
ballot accurate represents the proposals which have been formally
made and no-one will make additional formal proposals.
* After the time of the earliest CFV date, anyone is entitled to
start a vote on the wording(s) that remain proposed and not
withdrawn. We may delay the CFV to try to persuade other TC
members to withdraw or accept amendments.
I propose the following schedule:
* Initial formal proposals made: ASAP.
* Ballot draft Last Call: 1800 UTC Monday the 17th of February.
* Call for Votes: Any time after 1800 UTC Tuesday the 18th.
I don't think anyone can seriously object that this schedule is too
aggressive, in the context of what we've had before. Conversely any
earlier schedule would involve less than a week's formal discussion
period, or the Last Call period taking place over the weekend.
I am now going to press ahead with the first steps in this schedule.
If anyone jumps the gun on this schedule by calling for votes early
and without gettign consensus the list, I think TC members who agree
with my proposed schedule should rank FD first.
If you think this schedule is wrong you will need to convince your
fellow TC members to (a) vote FD on the 3rd CFV, to postpone again; or
(b) refrain from voting FD on an earlier CFV.