wanted: motu-sru members

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]

Jordan Mantha wrote:
> Well, I'm not sure if legitimacy is neccesarily lost. Some is I suppose
> is, but the team members are still MOTUs so the question is really
> whether a subset of MOTU should do some selection or whether the whole
> thing, top-to-bottom, should be handled by MOTU-at-large. Ideally I
> would like the entire MOTU team deciding teams but issues I see are:
>   * many MOTU don't vote in the first place. I don't believe we've ever
> gotten over 50%. Most votes during MOTU Meetings are 4-8 people.

That's not comparable. In a meeting, you need to be present on it, and you have
about one minute or two to cast your vote. In this policy, you would have one
week for it.

>   * historically I don't see where we've been able to comprehensively
> vett people without devolving into a flamefest.

Is this in favour or against MOTU doing the vote? If against, I can't see how
the SRU/Release teams doing a pre-selection (or IOW, vetoing some candidates)
helps, versus the MOTU team voting other people.

>   * time consuming. Giving time for comments, time for nominatiions,
> time for voting, etc. can easily make the process of getting new members
> take at least 1 month.

If we set it for 1 week for nominations, and one week for votes, the process
would about two weeks, which sounds reasonable to me.

Cheers,
Emilio

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-motu/attachments/20080526/03684ba5/attachment-0001.pgp