On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 15:22 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Ray Strode <halfline@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> The other positions will be filled by general election > >> every two years. As a special exception, four seats will be filled in > >> one year, with those positions chosen at random (unless some number of > >> members decide to step down). Voting will follow the standard Fedora > >> election process and be open to all contributors in the CLA+1 group. > >> > >> In the event that a current member relinquishes their seat, that seat > >> will be filled by the first runner up in the previous election. If > >> that person is not able or willing to fill the seat, it will go to > >> each successive runner up until the seat is filled. > > > > I think, I personally, would rather see the previous working group > > decide new members of the working group. They're the ones doing the > > work, so they should get the most say in the direction the work goes. > > (the whole "fedora is a meritocracy not a democracy" thing). > > > > Put another way: I don't think someone who works on desktop related > > software should have much say in who gets to be put in the cloud > > working group, or vice-versa. > > > > Let the people already doing the work decide the continuing direction > > of the work. > > If things really get off course, fesco can intervene, but I don't > > think that will happen. > > Fair. To be honest, the more I think about it the more I dislike the > idea of doing full blown elections. They seem overkill and cumbersome > when it comes to coordinating, etc. I strongly support this view - the end result of having too many elections is that only a tiny fraction of people have the attention to understand what is going on and vote. It also seems problematical to have a elected working group that falls under the supervision of FESCO which is also elected. What if FESCO and the group disagree? > In your opinion, should we have term limits imposed to ensure we have > fresh members coming into the WG? As I said in another email, I think > we should shoot for some continuity while also encouraging new members > to step up. >From my experience I doubt this will be necessary - there is a strong natural turnover of any such group based on people eventually getting bored or having their attention drawn elsewhere. - Owen -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
