Re: Technical committee resolution
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 05:10:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I do agree with Ian, however, that the tech-ctte is one of the worst
> examples for limiting hats for a slightly different reason: the tech-ctte
> needs to make decisions for the project that the project can then
> implement. Yes, this has been a weakness already, but one way in which
> that could be addressed is by having *more* tech-ctte members who are on
> core teams so that they can go make the resolution happen.
This is at odds with the "Judicial branch" metaphor and the current
conflict-resolution duties of the ctte. If there is overlap between
the people resolving the conflict and the people introducing or
fomenting it, then I think the structure is doomed from the get-go.
> For an entirely theoretical example, if the tech-ctte were to make a
> decision about what software is acceptable to include in the archive and
> Jeorg were on the tech-ctte, I think it would be more, not less, likely
> that the decision would then be implemented.
That would seem to undermine attempts to decentralize power and achieve
proper segregation of duties, in keeping with Manoj's aims.
Reply to: