Governance vs. Charter

[John Dulaney]

> <nod> The term/selection of members is a point that I think could
> definitely use work. The cloud SIG has the precedent rationale and
> the unlimited term but I'm not sure precedent is what we should look
> for in this group. I think it depends heavily on what we decide our
> work should consist of.
>
> I think the idea I proposed about us being here to guide new ideas to
> a point where they can be taken to the Base Design or live on their
> own lends itself very well to a term-limited or elected group. As
> ideas get implemented and grow their own community, the people who
> understood it well can move on to lead those groups. The people who
> replace them should be interested in new technologies that are just
> starting the incubation process.
>
> On the other hand, during FPC SCL discussions it had been suggested
> that the Environments and Stacks WG might be a place to approve or
> reject new SCLs. That sort of body should be very heavily
> precedent-oriented (so that two similar cases do not end up with one
> approved and one rejected simply due to who was serving on the WG at
> the time each went up for a vote). If we decided that this would be
> in our scope I think that the unlimited terms and self-selection from
> the committee membership is a necessary match.
>
> (My personal leaning at the moment -- Do not take on the approval of
> new SCLs. Do implement term limits).
> -Toshio

I am surely +1 on not taking on approving SCLs.

John