| 1 |
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 3:03 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2. The leads of these projects should be selected by the projects like |
| 3 |
> any other project, but confirmed by the council. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I agree with much of what you posted, but this one bit keeps coming up |
| 6 |
and I'm not sure how well it will work. What happens if the two can't |
| 7 |
agree? Devrel appoints a lead and council doesn't confirm. Who runs |
| 8 |
Devrel until the the new lead is selected? What if the two cannot |
| 9 |
reach agreement? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Maybe just spell that out - Devrel selects and council confirms, and |
| 12 |
if by so many days after the election of a new council agreement |
| 13 |
hasn't been reached then the council can appoint? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I think all are agreed that Council/Trustees/etc should generally be |
| 16 |
hands-off, and in reality this is how they have been operating all |
| 17 |
along. However, I think it still makes sense to keep these bodies at |
| 18 |
the top of the chain of command. It isn't really healthy to define |
| 19 |
ambiguous command structures (though our Council/Trustees division |
| 20 |
obviously raises this issue already). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Rich |
Archives