The "Membership" section of the governance charter draft

[Miloslav Trmač]

Hello,
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 11:05 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
<johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:
> and pump the number of server community members to 11 or 13 ( we are going
> to need all those people anyway. )

My experience from FESCo is that 9 can already make it challenging to
keep up with the conversation (fairly frequently the IRC discussion
ends up having 2 or 3 parallel sub-threads); having more members, and
having all their opinions heard within a time-limited meeting is also
more of a challenge.  (And, if it ever came to that, I really can't
imagine a phone discussion about a complex/controversial topic in 13
people, at least not without a costly protocol to give only one person
voice at a time.)

> There should be just one election and that's for the server group that will
> replaces the initial *chosen* WG after that there should not be any other
> elections that's a burden we do not want in a process like this so we either
> do as my proposal indicates which is to have each composition group being
> responsabile for chosing their member to appoint to their respective seat by
> or the individual stepping down selects another individual to take his place
> or better yet the remaining members of the WG choose an individual to take
> that seat.

I don't think long serving terms, and especially indefinite serving
terms, are healthy: there should be an easy way for the community to
self-correct without requiring extraordinary effort like finding a
thick-skinned "opposition leader" to set up a recall election or the
like.

AFAICT unlike (Czech and US at least) national governments, the Fedora
elections have always had very low overhead and basically no campaign
/ pre-election posturing seasons disruptive to the project; there
hasn't been much burden to speak of.
     Mirek