On Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:50:54 -0500 Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Brian Pepple > <bpepple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 23:15 -0500, Max Spevack wrote: > >> On Tue, 1 Mar 2011, seth vidal wrote: > >> > > >> > How is the CWG appointed/elected? How long are they granted > >> > seats? > > > > This current make-up of the CWG has been given a one-year term > > limit. We haven't yet worked on a recommendation to the Board on > > how to handle future appointment/elections for the CWG, since we > > wanted to get the COC stuff finished first. > > In light of that, it might be better to change the final decision > makers to the Board. Having a deciding body with a 1 year term limit > and no succession plan in place seems slightly wrong. My suggestion > is to make the last bullet read: > > * The final decision takes place with the Fedora Board, or a delegate > of their choosing. > > That still allows the CWG to act but covers the document if the CWG is > disbanded. Yeah, that seems like a good change to me. If the CWG doesn't exist past it's one year mandate this would allow the board to handle this or delegate. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
