On 14-08-2011 12:22:54 +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 08/14/2011 12:19 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 14-08-2011 12:06:57 +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
> >> My proposal is:
> >> 
> >> 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
> > 
> > Why not make this a 1-year term also?
> Because having a QA team slacking for a year before you take action is
> too much :/. OTOH, maybe a 6-month term for DevRel makes more sense.

Ok, but then I'd prefer to make Council a monitoring entity of these
two.  That is, if QA or DevRel team(-lead) is slacking (however you
would define that), Council has the right to appoint a new lead (any
time).  That way you give the regular 1 year term to someone who does
his/her job, but allow to intervene directly as needed (and not after 6
months).

> >> This is just a brainstorming so please let me know what you think.
> > 
> > I think this could be a good idea.  It is probably best when the time
> > to vote on both QA and DevRel leads is halfway the term of the
> > council, else it may as well make as much sense to have the
> > dev-community vote on them directly.
> > 
> Fair point but given the turnout in the last Council elections I don't
> think developers will care to vote for QA/DevRel leaders. This is better
> if it is handled directly by their representatives ( Council )

Right, agree here.  I also believe the low turnout can be interpreted as
little to no interest to deal with stuff like this, so probably best
when Council does all the "work".


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level