Paul W. Frields wrote:
As I mentioned briefly in Tuesday's meeting, I placed a short draft of
an elections document at:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/SuccessionPlanning
I'd appreciate any additional review and comment. (Comments may take
the form of page edits.)
Agreed on 1) and 2)
on 3) Can we put 75% in numbers? What is the rationale behind having a
limit on Red Hat or non Red Hat seats? IMO, if its a elected position,
whoever gets elected should be deemed fit to do the job regardless of
their affiliation. Is Max Spevack, the Fedora Board lead or he is the
Fedora lead within Red Hat. If its the former, should it be a elected
position by Fedora contributors (as defined by rule 4) or within the board?
4) CLA completion and being part of atleast one specific Fedora group
like say Fedora Extras must be a requirement. Not everybody who has
signed the CLA has provided any meaningful contributions and thus are
not in the group of actual Fedora contributors. Having merely the CLA as
a requirement might be abused.
5)Adopting the Fedora Extras voting infrastructure seems a good
solution. Is that a generic app or does it require changes?
6) Unclear on what a 2/3 majority vote by "community" means. Who is the
community here? I believe 2/3 majority vote by just the board is enough
to decide.
Rahul
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list
fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
