policy for membership in MOTU key teams

[Jordan Mantha]

On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 7:33 AM, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu at kitterman.com>
wrote:

> On Sun, 25 May 2008 13:07:44 +0200 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
> <pochu at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >First draft for a policy for motu-{sru,release} membership:
> >
> >0/ The term of service for the motu-sru and motu-release teams is of one
> release
> >cycle (six months).
>
> I think it should be longer.  For motu-sru, their effort is continuous.
> For motu-release, we are still defining the pre-freeze work that needs to
> be done and so it's no clear when in a cycle this should best be done.
>

Perhaps somewhere around UDS might be a decent time?


>
>  I'd suggest we set the term to two years with the idea that most people
> won't actually do it  long.  That way people could be replaced on a rolling
> basis as needed.  Then neither team is likely to have a complete turnover
> and lose corporate memory/ take a while to get organized and block other
> people's work.
>

I very much agree with you that keeping people around and rolling
replacement is important. From my experience with MOTU SRU it takes a while
before you really get into the swing of things and I feel like as long as
people are willing to server we are better off keeping people in these
teams. Two years seems a bit long though, I would've gone for one year but 6
months seems too short.

Overall, there's sort of two things I think are important when it comes to
team membership terms. We want to balance keeping good people in and letting
people who don't have time/interest leave gracefully. Perhaps the 6 month
and 2 year suggestions could be combined by having 2 year terms with 6 month
"pings" to see any members wish to resign. That way people don't feel
neccesarily obligated to 2 years (that's quite a long time in Ubuntu terms)
but avoids having whole new votes every 6 months.

-Jordan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-motu/attachments/20080525/fa59b393/attachment.htm