Re: Maximum term for tech ctte members
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:16 PM, Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> Would anyone else be supportive of a proposal to set a term for tech ctte
> membership?
>
> The current tech ctte members were appointed:
>
> Ian: May/Dec 1998 (15 years, 5 months) [0]
> Bdale: Apr 2001 (13 years, 1 month) [1]
> Andreas: Jan 2006 (8 years, 4 months) [2]
> Steve: Jan 2006 (8 years, 4 months) [2]
> Russ: Jan 2009 (5 years, 4 months) [3]
> Don: Jan 2009 (5 years, 4 months) [3]
> Colin: Aug 2011 (2 years, 9 months) [4]
> Keith: Nov 2013 (6 months) [5]
>
> I think set terms, with no term limits would make sense (ie, you're
> appointed to the ctte, you stay on it for X years, then you either say
> "thanks, but enough's enough" or "that was fun, I'd like to keep doing
> it" and the ctte and DPL considers whether to reappoint you in the
> usual fashion.
>
> Personally, I think 3 or 4 year terms ought to be long enough, but
> that would mean kicking everyone but Colin and Keith off the ctte
> immediately. Terms of 6-8 years would leave half the current ctte around
> to reconstitute the ctte. With a term of 16 years (which no member has
> exceeded yet), a new member would have to be voted on once every two
> years on average to maintain a full 8-member ctte.
>
> I think it'd be healthy if there was a rule something like "an ex-member
> may not be reappointed to the committee unless someone else has been
> appointed to the ctte since s/he was last a member". That would mean
> you couldn'y have "Alice, Bob, Carol, Dave" as the tech ctte with an
> agreement that they'll just reappoint each other anytime their term
> expires; they'd have to appoint someone from outside the group (Emma,
> say) first. Call it an anti-Cabal measure. I'm not sure there's a simple
> and obvious way to phrase such a measure though, so maybe it's too hard.
>
> At present, the only way for someone to leave the tech ctte is for them to
> disappear, resign, or be hounded out by either their fellow ctte members
> or a GR. IMO, it would be nice if there was a way out of the ctte that had
> more of a feeling of winning / leaving at the top of the game than those.
>
> YMMV. I think I'd rather second a proposal along these lines than actually
> propose it...
>
> Cheers,
> aj
My apologies, I haven't been involved with Debian for that long in the
grand scheme of things, but my understanding was that the relatively
long average length of tenure of our TC was something I understood to
be a feature, not a bug. (IE: I thought the role was fairly limited,
and continuity and wisdom combined with strong technical understanding
were the key attributes that we value in the TC.)
While I would not be opposed to a requirement asking ctte to annually
reaffirm that they have the time and desire to continue, it seems to
my eyes that the current system doesn't seem functionally broken, and
would appreciate examples of actions or decisions made, as to why
change is needed/desired?
Thanks,
Brian
Reply to: