On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote:
> Some time ago, few people proposed to have Council appointed leaders for
> QA and DevRel. I like the idea because this way the Council can ensure
> that the team is active or either force some activity in case the
> current leader slacks big time.

++

> Membership and voting
> actions should not be related in these teams. The leader will still have
> control over the new members but Council will do the voting ( community
> will provide feedback ofc )

Are you suggesting that the leader has to be chosen within the team,
or that the council has to vote on individual team members?  I'm not
sure I like either of these.  I'd rather keep it simple: the council
can pick any developer they want to be the leader whatsoever, and then
the leader can run the team how they see fit.

> Devrel: 1 year term. Developers are nominated by others or they can
> self-nominated
>
> QA: 6-month term. Developers are nominated by others or they can
> self-nominated

So, my thought is something more like:

1.  The council reaches out to DevRel and QA teams and solicits
recommendations from them for the next team leader.
2.  The council sends to -dev an email summarizing the recommendations
and other candidates being considered, soliciting feedback from the
dev community.
3.  The council agrees by majority vote on who they want to lead each
team - that can be anybody in #1 or #2.  Waiting periods for feedback
are at the council's discretion.
4.  If a year goes by and all is well, the council goes back to #1.
5.  If at any point things are not well, the council is welcome to go
back to #1 at any time.  Nobody is given a guaranteed time in
"office."

Basically the relationship I propose between the Council and these
team leads is that of a board and its officers.  Officers serve at the
pleasure of the board, and while usually transitions are done in an
orderly manner, they do not need to be.  In most democratic nations,
the prime minister can be asked to step down at any time through a
no-confidence vote - but of course this is a rare occurrence.

The Council would of course do well to consider carefully the teams
own recommendations for their leads.  Cleaning house is not a good way
to run a shop unless it is truly rife with problems...

Rich