Governance vs. Charter

[Jens Petersen]

> I'd rather vote about members after some period. Let's say we need a
> year to start the initiative. After a year half of us could be replaced
> by other members of group. All members of WG could vote about it. Only
> half should be replaced, because at least half of members should be
> aware of what was happening past 6 months.

Yes, and I think it should still be possible for outgoing people
to stand for re-election if they wished to.

One thing that is not clear to me though is how we define the members
of the WG (beyond the voting members): ie who exactly would get to vote?
Would there be a FAS group for the membership perhaps
and a restricted Fedora Election?

My impression is that most of the other WGs are not implementing
elections in their Charters at this point?

> Even if our group is small now, it might be an obstacle in work of other WG.

Right - I noticed the draft of the Workstation PRD mentioned
requiring support for multiple stacks/environments for development.

Jens

ps (Personally I think something similar to nix [1] could be quite
an interesting approach to supporting different environments and stacks.
I need to look at "Formulas" too - I am not familiar with it.)

[1] http://nixos.org/nix/