policy for membership in MOTU key teams

[Scott Kitterman]

On Sunday 25 May 2008 13:57, Jordan Mantha wrote:
> 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

I think this is a good middle ground.  I support it.

Scott K