Re: Technical committee resolution
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> 1. The Technical Committee consists of up to 8 Developers.
Why drop the suggested minimum of 4? Does this mean a one-man
tech-ctte would be fine?
> 3. When there are 8 members, the Project Leader may appoint any
> Developer to the Technical Committee replacing the longest serving
> current member, provided there have not already been 2 or more
> appointments to the Technical Committee during the current Leader's
> term.
What should happen in a tie of service length?
Is it necessary to specify the 8 in more than one place?
> [...] There's nothing stopping the DPL from suggesting the oldest two
> TC members resigning, then reappointing them (so they become the youngest
> two TC members), if we actually do want to keep particular people on. [...]
Is that healthy? Having a minimum break is pretty common on other
groups and might help keep things fresh.
Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> wrote:
> So, I would replace your 2. with the current text, and your 3. with:
> 3. During any DPL term, the DPL might appoint up to two new members
> unilaterally. He might replace an existing member, or add them as
> additional members at his choice, provided the maximum number of eight
> members is not exceeded.
I don't think that makes sense. s/might/may/ or s/might/can/ please.
I'd also s/eight// because there seems no need to repeat the maximum
size and it could make future amendments smaller.
Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> wrote:
> How about considering ctte members having failed to participate in two
> consecutive decisions as having resigned?
Maybe three rather than two, but I like that idea better than maximum
term lengths between appointments, FWIW.
Regards,
--
MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 -
Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder,
consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ -
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
Reply to: