-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 12/01/2014 02:37 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > [ Cross post -vote, -project ; M-F-T: to -vote ] > > Hi, > > I am hereby formally submitting an alternative proposal, between > double-dashed lines below (formally it's an "amendment", but I don't expect > Stefano to accept it, as we discussed it before). I am also calling for > seconds (see below). > > =========================================================================== > > The Constitution is amended as follows: > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - --- constitution.txt.orig 2014-11-17 18:02:53.314945907 +0100 > +++ constitution.2-R.txt 2014-11-24 10:24:42.109426386 +0100 @@ -299,8 > +299,22 @@ Project Leader may appoint new member(s) until the number of > members reaches 6, at intervals of at least one week per appointment. - > 5. If the Technical Committee and the Project Leader agree they may + 5. > A Developer is not eligible to be (re)appointed to the Technical + > Committee if they have been a member within the previous 12 months. + 6. > If the Technical Committee and the Project Leader agree they may remove or > replace an existing member of the Technical Committee. + 7. Term limit: > + 1. On January 1st of each year the term of any Committee member + > who has served more than 54 months (4.5 years) and who is one + > of the N most senior members automatically expires. N is + > defined as 2-R (if R < 2) or 0 (if R >= 2). R is the number of + > former members of the Technical Committee who have resigned, + > or been removed or replaced within the previous 12 months. + 2. A > member of the Technical Committee is said to be more senior + > than another if they were appointed earlier, or were appointed + > at the same time and have been a member of the Debian Project + > longer. In the event that a member has been appointed more + > than once, only the most recent appointment is relevant. > > 6.3. Procedure > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > =========================================================================== > > Rationale --------- First, I think that there is wide agreement that a more > regular turn-over among TC members would be a good thing. And both > Stefano's and this proposal aim at addressing this, by ensuring that at > least 2 members of the TC are replaced every year. > > However, too much turn-over, with more than 2 replacements at one point of > time, might have negative effects too. The TC might be temporarily weakened > by having more young members; replacing more than two members at one point > will cause less replacements later; it increases the difficulty of finding > new members. > > The recent situation, with three TC members resigning, should not be > treated as exceptional in the context of this resolution. If it were to > happen again, I don't think that we should add one or two automatic > expirations to the three resignations. > > This proposal differs from the original proposal by counting all > resignations and removals as part of the desirable "2 per year" replacement > rate, so that the total number of replacements does not exceed two if only > one or two younger members decide to resign. > > This version of the proposal could even result in an internal TC > discussion: "OK, the Project wants two members to be replaced. Are there > members that feel like resigning now? Or should we just fallback to the > default of expiring the two most senior members?". I think that such a > discussion would be a healthy way for each TC member to evaluate its > status. The orignal proposal could have the detrimental effect of pushing > inactive/demotivated members to stay on the TC until their expiration, to > avoid causing additional churn. > > Note that there are a few examples to compare the behaviour of the 2-S and > 2-R proposals in <20141126142529.ga31...@xanadu.blop.info>. > > Calling for seconds ------------------- The DPL can propose general > resolutions or GR amendments without seeking seconds. I initially wanted to > waive that right, to only have this option on the ballot if there's > sufficient interest from others, but the Secretary declined (in > <20141124232153.ga17...@roeckx.be>). I am therefore seeking seconds, and > will withdraw this alternative proposal if it does not reach the required > number of seconds by December 10th. > > Thanks ------ I would like to thank Stefano for organizing the discussion > around this GR, and preparing the various versions of the resolution and > amendments. > > Lucas >
seconded - -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJUfhgHAAoJEOs2Fxpv+UNfdoIP/i0CLWgPvVVCGF7VNTjlNQJi +GAau08SMP81GjE4gkj7ZHVhxpNDfFwj88j1rE3X7VEPqqQjAdj2U3Ugcs5wB3Kp pr71queoEaBe0jaloONc48K2B/yey8tyt/OSW+A3ljLYjRY0KtvcZiIiNBNfDGF+ HDY2pstn38lkncsMHvInSh8RFbGwD0hmweAqxyEmXZ/1TnkchAKYe4n4AW3d7rJj RUcXv8MxoLjrDyxYwjKE11s3yZNcN4rlYCo+6T1RiRNuM68NzcrscVRbI5HS17la 5uuyI0RKyFyrPxUhuiE3yGeNJVulKrNzI3+eGcnYPJ5tT9M+ySC1Wl9ap/JVmy9t LqS95l8LKNYFIv68M0PG/9a5YZw5gOEFojMA3u5Fih1blYyU3MEt6txnSTdxOh76 vZrngVxcKW7R2EzgYmuwJpmc+JcIql7pKmak2PA/Ne4XilyaqReMvgtHWvocjFjx uZfnic51rNirI214R9oGrp+y1yvYekJiYLcA4xh8doabi1RuaQe4IKmHX6kfxsnu dsxZyRx6yZpZXl1tu5DOYFHigrScv2QYESYNiYE6AyQUqY3JZ1nRccPRHIlSFe1/ susyNU5dx0PhLtQUt2K5Hl2ylw7WagIC02R7HasFImkhO/eLeqV/x0he6tQBMeNZ 6vnty6XCbzyCpKgxBwBh =yJNE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/547e1807.1050...@bzed.de