| 1 |
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:01 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." |
| 2 |
<phajdan.jr@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Note, applies to all drafts: what if the council doesn't want to confirm |
| 4 |
> the elected lead? Another election? Council appoints their own guy? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
That was in part why I defined options 2-3. If the lead is not |
| 7 |
confirmed, then there is no lead. When there is no lead the council |
| 8 |
can appoint an interim lead. So, until the team picks a lead the |
| 9 |
council can live with, the council has the right to appoint one. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> Are there any protections about being simultaneously a Council member |
| 12 |
> and QA team lead/deputy? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I see no issues with this. They're still accountable to the entire |
| 15 |
council either way. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> If there is a conflict between a developer and QA that gets escalated to |
| 19 |
> Comrel and the developer appeals to Council, this appeal process will |
| 20 |
> still work - right? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Yup. That's the ultimate control. The Council is in the de-facto |
| 23 |
rule of the QA lead no matter what - this is just about not |
| 24 |
micro-managing the QA team. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Rich |
Archives