> Here's the second draft of the charter. Thanks, Josh! Overall it looks pretty good to me - I have put some comments below. > The FESCo liaison is always a member of the decision making group for > the Work Group. The liaison is responsible for presenting the WG > decisions and summary of WG discussions to FESCo on a regular basis. > They will also take feedback or requirements from FESCo back to the > WG. The liaison is not required to be a FESCo member, but should be > able to regularly attend the FESCo meetings. good > Members of the Work Group are chosen by the Work Group as seats become > available. In the event that a current member relinquishes their > seat, the Work Group will fill the seat by selecting a candidate and > approving by majority consensus. Eligible candidates must be in the > FPCA+1 group. The Work Group is highly encouraged to seek out > candidates that have been showing persistent and high quality > contribution to the Workstation product. Basically looks okay to me. What does the "+1" mean here though? Is "FPCA Group" sufficient? However some Red Hatters are in the Red Hat Employee CLA group instead. > For bigger issues, where there may be disagreement, or where there is > long-term impact, or where an action may not easily be undone, we > will put forth a formal proposal on the mailing list with a > "[Proposal for Vote] header in the email Subject: field. Working > group members can vote +1 to approve, -1 to disagree, or 0 to abstain; > five +1 votes are necessary for a measure to pass. Should a timeframe for voting be mentioned? Within one week? > In the event that a live meeting is held in IRC to discuss an issue, > proposals will be done in much the same way. A member will put forth > an official proposal by prefixing a summary of such with "Proposal:" > and WG members will vote as above. Results will be recorded and > posted in any meeting minutes. Sounds reasonable > (NOTE: I chose option #2 from the previous draft for now. If you'd > like to see something different, please speak up. I don't believe > anyone commented on this section specifically.) Not sure which would be more effective and practical. If we are not going to have a WG mailing-list then perhaps a trac instance would be good idea and help to separate WG business from general desktop discussion? Do we have a wiki space yet? Thanks, Jens -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
