Notes in-line below.
On 3/8/22 16:53, Dan Streetman wrote:
On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 8:20 AM Mattia Rizzolo<mapr...@ubuntu.com> wrote:
* you say that the chair can be replaced at any time, but I propose that
such change require a supermajority (3/4th of the team) and since the
team is owned by the TB, that also needs to be accepted by them
agreed on requiring TB approval - but I'm not sure about requiring a
supermajority of votes?
I feel like if a majority of team members aren't happy with the chair,
then the chair probably should be replaced, no? And the TB will have
final approval to keep or allow replacement of the chair.
I don't think we need supermajority for this. TB vote on this just
needs a simple majority at the TB level to be a change.
* require that the team has at least a quarterly meeting (despite
currently being fortnight)
ack, added.
* you haven't specified *who* can apply. I recommend to require MOTUs.
i think we should move the specific membership requirements and
process into simple team policies, don't you? there is the requirement
in the charter for the team to document membership requirements and
application process in our public docs.
re: MOTU, i agree, but also ~sru-developers I suggest?
MOTUs, Core Devs, SRU developers, my 2 cents. (This will be the vast
majority of people who will have tech skills to know if they can do the
work backporters needs)
* what's with the "may 1st" thing about the chair? especially if
somebody is "promoted" to chair, that would make for an awkward
situation, so what's the reason behind that?
* so you think we should vote to extend everybody's membership? That
sounds like too much work, wouldn't it? also I don't really see a
need for it. And if you think it'd be useful, then everybody should
expire the same date so that we can just hold one yearly meeting
renewing (or not) everybody at once.
yeah all this isn't needed for our team - i was thinking more of
issues with some other teams.
* 7.1.5 "at the chair’s discretion" - here I suppose you are referring
to the meeting chair, not the team chair, right? (which could be
different)
yep, added the clarification.
overall if feels more complicated than it needs to be, but effectively
it's what we've been doing, so it should be fine.
indeed, i agree it's unfortunately far more complicated than i would
like it to be. And yes, I basically just tried to write up in painful
detail what we already do.
The draft is updated with these changes now, can you take another look?
Thomas
--
ubuntu-backports mailing list
ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
