| 1 |
On 3/13/17 3:28 PM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> A lead is only needed if the team can't get a decision. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Saying that the team could call for re-election if they don't like |
| 6 |
> lead's decision is ridiculous from my view: Like said it isn't the lead |
| 7 |
> who controls the direction. It is the lead who should step down if |
| 8 |
> he/she doesn't feel comfortable with the team decision and no longer |
| 9 |
> wants to represent the project anymore because he/she disagree so much |
| 10 |
> with the team decision. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
The security team has always worked in a process where the direction of |
| 13 |
the team (with the leads) has always been decided as a team. Based on |
| 14 |
reading the GLEP it is the goal of it to assign responsibility and not |
| 15 |
to take control away from the other team members. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
We have always discussed and voted on things in full disclosure. I see |
| 18 |
nothing changing from the way we do things, and nothing is changing from |
| 19 |
the way it is, projects have leads. People vote on project leads, the |
| 20 |
security team has had and voted on project leads for a long time before. |
| 21 |
There were two before, Alex and Tobias. Making it one or two is a |
| 22 |
decision that can easily be discussed. Making it 15 leads just does not |
| 23 |
work. |
Archives