| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 06/10/11 07:44, Sebastian Pipping wrote: |
| 5 |
> On 06/09/2011 03:37 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 6 |
>> do we need some kind of policy around membership on "special" |
| 7 |
>> project teams. QA and Devrel are the most obvious examples, Infra might |
| 8 |
>> be another. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> in my eyes we do. too much power to be unregulated. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> what does it take to get this rolling? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Part of me thinks this is a good idea for the simple reason that some |
| 15 |
people seem to have issues with QA/DevRel. Perhaps if the lead were |
| 16 |
"appointed by council" there would be less raging every time the team |
| 17 |
tried to do anything. But then again, we can't all play nice over a |
| 18 |
freaking ChangeLog, even with Council making the call, so I somehow |
| 19 |
doubt this will fix *anything at all* |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I do not want to see "elections" for 3 team leads. As far as I'm |
| 22 |
concerned, it's way too much of a hassle. Having said that, council |
| 23 |
appointments for the team lead may not be a bad idea. Maybe it will |
| 24 |
work. I doubt it, but I'm open to try it. My fear there is I don't want |
| 25 |
to see team leads changing every year just because there is a new |
| 26 |
council. If the team is working well together, there is no sense in |
| 27 |
fubaring that merely because we "can". |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Perhaps do council appointments if the lead steps down / if the team |
| 30 |
calls for a re-appointment (there would need to be rules for this part. |
| 31 |
I don't want to see a new "appointee" merely because the lead upset one |
| 32 |
person. Perhaps if more than 50% of the team or like 10 other developers |
| 33 |
are asking for a new lead or some such foo.) |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Also, while I like the idea of "cleaning" out those teams once in a |
| 36 |
while for inactive members, I'm not a huge fan of a new lead coming in |
| 37 |
and removing people from the team just because. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Lastly, given that it will be the lead for a given team, I think that |
| 40 |
team should have the ability to pick their "candidates" to go to |
| 41 |
council, and maybe just give Council the vote on who gets it. Or, have |
| 42 |
council appoint people they think are fit, and the team can vote from |
| 43 |
there. Either way I think would work alright. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Just my 2 cents. |
| 46 |
Regards, |
| 47 |
- -- |
| 48 |
Dane Smith (c1pher) |
| 49 |
Gentoo Linux Developer -- QA / Crypto / Sunrise / x86 |
| 50 |
RSA Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x0C2E1531&op=index |
| 51 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 52 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) |
| 53 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJN8haaAAoJEEsurZwMLhUxBssQAINmFDp4jYccbNlVmb6iu4QI |
| 56 |
4n4Dlg5BXFhIGJu0gCc+Vx7YxvyL+5stNJthKqpeE1ics/2yhBHK/Jc+DTDLyM2G |
| 57 |
CrYDIC2oS+4spa/DgG0/LDW6RlpLObl3cTnYDtyXq6Fu3+uKTXFm2KIghhHA18cX |
| 58 |
WHUZRyuocIhkMFvQzIwrddzx8UYvtlFJCB0CUu6ke4/5YE/Q7yBEXEt7GlMNHA5o |
| 59 |
gwxATVoyyN4M+Q2rxQXuv2IeW9X5DCjOP5LyT6sbOanYPSAgr+95MTxoGZ8LtJu9 |
| 60 |
iODYN85C/4DaNtyhFvzYA2KtlywRKH1fJwChCPVlIq3SuEdJvpQ6zvvS2UdSm6no |
| 61 |
qc8oyZEEI076dOiSnT69cyLrsXm9gRY3tIyh1pHmfYzKVVi89yrMzCpKOEd8GL2v |
| 62 |
V9Xss4JJBZbi60HfYp3gJqozhK6btSsbJ7sH3Kl66nTkownwSEZVigzurAOm+ct5 |
| 63 |
r7/zKQR8s/fUtFP6bVprDgJpQKMi4TMPYgti6IM7g2iAYfK4v2JCFxUdf0QB/+Is |
| 64 |
F/XriVGcotvt85Mgj96uzn1I/U1OzrkRdUh30SHectJ91fEHOIVEu1QYbCIWZXKD |
| 65 |
0UTJ2BUMZqvPW+8BuHb3G/sYu6iRsHbTKPLYa5vgw2V5nfgjU7fFP0XPEIgbCF/M |
| 66 |
4+/PcKQUwBOiIpcl+NDc |
| 67 |
=8ajo |
| 68 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives