Board/Project Governance

[Josh Boyer]

On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno at wolff.to> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 09:57:56 -0400,
>   Josh Boyer <jwboyer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at fedoraproject.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm curious as to what people think.  I'm putting this out there as a
>>> discussion starter.  Hopefully the discussion it generates is positive
>>> and thought provoking.
>>
>>
>> So, I was serious when I said the above.  I mean, I figured maybe
>> comments would be light on Friday, but it's been 3 days and only two
>> people have made any comments at all (thank you).  None of the Board
>> members have said anything.
>>
>> Or have I done the impossible?  Have I proposed something that is
>> either universally agreeable or universally hated?  Seems unlikely.
>
>
> Partly, I'm not sure how big a difference this will really make. I think the
> main point of the two appointed positions is to make sure there is
> diversity, similar to what your proposal is trying to do.
>
> Your proposal does need some more detailing before it's really ready to
> implement. One significant issue is, what if no one on a group wants to be

I didn't want to get bogged down in implementation details before we
have a general consensus (on way or another).

> on both that group and the board at the same time? Board work is a lot

I dunno.  Then the group loses its seat on the Board and is replaced
with a group that cares?

> different than working on many of the functional teams. (Several people
> seemed to have burned out pretty quickly being on the board.) Is there going

I think that is unrelated to the workload.

> to be some kind of guidance issued on how teams are going to pick their
> board representative and how long that person will serve? Could this result

Maybe.  Mostly I was going to leave it up to them though.  The seat is
supposed to be a representative of that group.

> in times when too much of the board turns over at once? Some more

Undecided.

> documentation on what kind of work and time commitments are expected from
> board members is probably needed, so that people have a better idea of what
> they are signing up for. Compared to other groups, I think the full
> ramifications of being a board member is less visible than with other
> groups. That would be nice to see whether the method for choosing board
> members changes or not.

If we had that, we could give it to potential Board candidates today.
We don't have estimates for the Board, and the ramifications of being
a Board member are pretty small to be honest.

josh