| 1 |
On 2/11/2013 21:06, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
> I think that the QA team should be given a chance to resolve the issue |
| 3 |
> within the framework of GLEP 48. |
| 4 |
I agree, and hope that the issue being raised here is the catalyst for |
| 5 |
resolution without intervention. Of course, I would not have raised the |
| 6 |
issue here in the first place if I did not feel that it could be |
| 7 |
resolved internally. I understand that I am not the only one to have |
| 8 |
such frustrations, so I hope others chime in with their experiences. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> If neither electing a team lead nor admitting new members will work |
| 11 |
> out, then it means that there's a deadlock and some external action |
| 12 |
> must be taken to break it. However, the council appointing a project |
| 13 |
> lead would be against the principles of both GLEP 48 and (more |
| 14 |
> important) GLEP 39. So maybe the council should rather admit new |
| 15 |
> members to the team. |
| 16 |
I agree. If the Council accepts the agenda item and decides to take |
| 17 |
action, I suggest that they temporarily assume the function of team lead |
| 18 |
as specified in GLEP 48. After calling for new members and approving |
| 19 |
those suitably qualified, a new lead can be elected from the |
| 20 |
newly-formed team. |
Archives