Team charter

[Dan Streetman]

On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 6:37 PM Thomas Ward <teward at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
> Notes in-line below.
>
> On 3/8/22 16:53, Dan Streetman wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 8:20 AM Mattia Rizzolo <mapreri at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
> * you say that the chair can be replaced at any time, but I propose that
>   such change require a supermajority (3/4th of the team) and since the
>   team is owned by the TB, that also needs to be accepted by them
>
> agreed on requiring TB approval - but I'm not sure about requiring a
> supermajority of votes?
>
> I feel like if a majority of team members aren't happy with the chair,
> then the chair probably should be replaced, no? And the TB will have
> final approval to keep or allow replacement of the chair.
>
> I don't think we need supermajority for this.  TB vote on this just needs a simple majority at the TB level to be a change.

Just to add my clarification opinion on this - I don't think our
charter should state anything about how the TB operates to provide
approval (or rejection); the TB should decide how they want to do
that, and our team should only care about the result.

But I do agree that the TB should stick to a simple majority for
decisions like this (but since I'm not on the TB or CC, my opinion is
not relevant ;-)

>
>
> * require that the team has at least a quarterly meeting (despite
>   currently being fortnight)
>
> ack, added.
>
> * you haven't specified *who* can apply.  I recommend to require MOTUs.
>
> i think we should move the specific membership requirements and
> process into simple team policies, don't you? there is the requirement
> in the charter for the team to document membership requirements and
> application process in our public docs.
>
> re: MOTU, i agree, but also ~sru-developers I suggest?
>
> MOTUs, Core Devs, SRU developers, my 2 cents.  (This will be the vast majority of people who will have tech skills to know if they can do the work backporters needs)

I set up a draft membership page:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBackports/Membership

to be clear, I think this page is separate from the charter and
changes to it may be made in the future without any consultation with
the TB.

>
>
> * what's with the "may 1st" thing about the chair?  especially if
>   somebody is "promoted" to chair, that would make for an awkward
>   situation, so what's the reason behind that?
> * so you think we should vote to extend everybody's membership?  That
>   sounds like too much work, wouldn't it?  also I don't really see a
>   need for it.  And if you think it'd be useful, then everybody should
>   expire the same date so that we can just hold one yearly meeting
>   renewing (or not) everybody at once.
>
> yeah all this isn't needed for our team - i was thinking more of
> issues with some other teams.
>
> * 7.1.5 "at the chair’s discretion" - here I suppose you are referring
>   to the meeting chair, not the team chair, right?  (which could be
>   different)
>
> yep, added the clarification.
>
> overall if feels more complicated than it needs to be, but effectively
> it's what we've been doing, so it should be fine.
>
> indeed, i agree it's unfortunately far more complicated than i would
> like it to be. And yes, I basically just tried to write up in painful
> detail what we already do.
>
> The draft is updated with these changes now, can you take another look?
>
>
>
> Thomas