The following comments are candid and frank, submitted with respect to the OGB.
Firstly, I personal believe that there should be some leading statement or preamble on the document. Secondly, I personally believe the tone of the document is far too informal. It reads more like a README than a constitution. Regarding Section 1.1: * Projects should be defined rather as "Working groups assembled to collaborate on a distinct cause/effort." Projects may not involve code repositories or integration tools, for example docs. * Electorate should be defined rather as "A superset of the community empowered to vote in elections." The current wording wrongly suggests the electorate governs, rather than simply elect the governors. Regarding Section 1.2: * The roles strike me as too generic. Regarding Section 2.3: * Special elections to "fill any vacancies on the board" seems to me to contradict 3.4. Regarding 3.1: * With respect, the section seems generic and flimsy. It ascribes no real power to the OGB. "help mediate disputes" seems an option rather than requirement... thus if a dispute arose and the involved parties rejected OGB intervention I see no reason the constitution should allow the OGB to intercede. Regarding 3.4.1: * This should be entitled "OGB Dissolution", rather than Community. Regarding 3.8: * There are no bounds put around committees, nor power given to them. Regarding 4.1: * Again, as with 3.1, there is no word that the board can intervene, only that it can if asked. Furthermore, the resolution it provides is not binding. Regarding 4.2: * This seems needless, excessive, and dangerious. "violates the Community's norms"? That's very scary. === In regards to the whole: * The document does not describe the rights or responsibilities of anyone or anything. Further, I do not see sufficient power delegated to anyone. Whereas the current constitution is lacking is definition of power, this draft is completely bereft of it. (bordering on violation of 2.4 of the Charter) * The Charter states that the constitution shall describe the "intended methods of communication between the OGB and Sun"... this document does not. * Again, the tone is excessively informal. As I have historically, so do I also now, believe in a strong OGB and a strong constitution. I do not believe that this draft establishes either. Furthermore, I see no advantages in this new document as opposed to the existing. With humility and respect, benr. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
