| 1 |
On 19.6.2013 23.18, hasufell wrote: |
| 2 |
> While I appreciate devrel being more active in serious situations (I |
| 3 |
> actually proposed that in another thread), I question the way Devrel |
| 4 |
> is constituted. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> How was devrel formed? Who started it? What's the procedure of getting in? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
The project is old: |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
revision 1.1 |
| 12 |
date: 2003-07-14 00:49:03 +0300; author: seemant; state: Exp; |
| 13 |
first version of project description page |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
While I have been here for a better part of the decade, older farts (in |
| 16 |
dev time) are needed to comment on who started it. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> What is a possible solution? |
| 20 |
> Let the council elect all members. That way the power still comes from |
| 21 |
> the dev community, although they do not vote devrel directly. The |
| 22 |
> council should vote anonymously, so that no connection between council |
| 23 |
> member and elected devrel member can be drawn which could otherwise |
| 24 |
> affect the election of the council. |
| 25 |
> This system should prevent people from thinking two steps ahead when |
| 26 |
> voting the council. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The council can already do that if they so choose. Granted if this |
| 30 |
process was made explicit it could have some influence on the turnover. |
| 31 |
In practice so far oversight has not been a problem (though since for |
| 32 |
quite a few years I have been part of both bodies the two have been |
| 33 |
quite connected). |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Regards, |
| 36 |
Petteri |
Archives