Discussion of Server Working Group governance

Stephen Gallagher sgallagh at redhat.com
Mon Oct 28 12:55:44 UTC 2013

Hash: SHA1

The first goal of the Working Group process is to plan our governance
process for future members of the Server Working Group. I think the
place we should start is by gathering a list of requirements that a
governance charter will need to keep in mind. I'll list my thoughts
below, please raise your own concerns as well.

In no particular order (stream of consciousness):

== Voting Members ==
 * Number of voting members for the Working Group.
 * How long a term do the voting members serve?
 * Should there be term limits or mandatory breaks?
 * Should there be reserved chairs for specific constituencies (e.g.
QA, Ambassadors, Release Engineering)?
 * Voting method?[1]
 * Who can vote?[2]
 * Recalls?

== Charter ==
 * How do we approve the initial charter?[3]
 * How do we later amend the charter?[4]

== My initial thoughts ==
I am open to counter-arguments, naturally.

[1] For simplicity, I suspect we want to stick with range-voting as in
the other elections. We already have the tools for this.
[2] I recommend we stick with FPCA+1 as a rule for voting.
[3] For the initial charter, I think if it's not unanimous, we need to
keep talking.
[4] I think amendments should require "voting members - 1". It
shouldn't be possible for a single dissenting vote to hold things up
(they should get to have their say), but otherwise I think that a
near-unanimous vote should be required to change the fundamental
guiding document.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/


More information about the server mailing list