On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 06:40:22PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Anthony Towns a...@erisian.com.au writes:
Would anyone else be supportive of a proposal to set a term for tech
ctte membership?
I just mentioned this today in our TC meeting, so obviously I've been
thinking along these lines as
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 01:07:11AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 06:58:36PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
I believe a maximum of 5 years in a
row with a minimum 1-year suspension before being able to join again
would work well for our tech-ctte.
I think 5 years
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 01:07:11AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
- continuity is valuable in a body like the tech-ctte, where there
aren't that many decisions on a yearly basis (and hence, for instance,
it takes time to get new members up to speed).
You could get continuity by having
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 01:07:11AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
- more generally, I think that all Debian core teams (if not *all*
teams...) would benefit from a turnover process that requires
individual members to reaffirm, on a yearly basis, their continued
interest in keeping
Quoting Francesca Ciceri (2014-05-24 09:30:26)
Also:
http://blog.zouish.org/nonupdd/#/22 and the next 2-3 slides.
Very nice slides, the whole set!
(and I mean the content, not the slick wrapping)
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website:
Anthony Towns a...@erisian.com.au writes:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 06:40:22PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Other bodies of this type take a variation on this approach (and of the
reappointment rule you propose below) that I quite like: after each
term, that member may not be reappointed for some
6 matches
Mail list logo
