[TEAM] Vote on changes to the meeting structure
flocculant at gmx.co.uk
flocculant at gmx.co.uk
Fri Oct 16 22:47:06 UTC 2015
On 16/10/15 21:13, Pasi Lallinaho wrote:
> Since the meetings have been far apart, and not many people have been
> around, let's do the voting on the meeting structure changes on the
> mailing list. Here's the proposal again for clarity:
> 1) Stop running the "Team updates" section
> Pasting the updates in a meeting means more work (through having to
> memorize/note down items) for contributors. It also means that those
> who can't attend the meeting (which means many people per meeting),
> can't paste the updates unless somebody does this for them.
> Since we now have a timeline tab  in the tracker, most of these
> updates can be seen live.
> The only real change in action contributors would need to take would
> apply to work items. Practically this means that everything that could
> be worth mentioning for people outside the team - or added in the
> release notes - should be in the blueprints. Doing the updates like
> this also improves their findability. As I see it, this isn't much
> different from what we currently do, or at least what I try to do.
> Finally, the updates that aren't worth/important enough to add to the
> blueprints could still be shared in the meeting, thus...
> 2) Rename the "Announcements" section to "Updates and Announcements"
> This is just semantics, but it should be done to avoid confusion and
> be more accurate.
> Team members, cast your vote by sending +1, -1 or +/-0 on this list.
> If you wish to vote privately, you cand send a mail to Simon or me
> (you'll find the emails - or can ask on IRC).
> We'll have a week for the votes. The results are gathered and
> published after next Friday (or after 21UTC next Friday) when me and
> Simon crash on IRC at the same time.
The other side of this being - how long do we wait as a team for members
of that team to vote?
I see no reason why we'd not be good to expect a response for something
'less important' as no more than a month.
For something that has importance to Xubuntu as a whole I would expect
some response somewhat faster - even if that response was 'foo' caught
me on the phone, I'm not able to vote, my feeling is *this*'
Thus we can take into consideraration people's POV.
example - there are 14 (currently) of us
we have a vote, two of us are awol (ish), team is 14
vote gets taken and stands at 6 +, 6- with 2 to vote, 1 does, the second
does *life* stuff*
at 2 weeks, the vote is now 7+,6- and the vote carries
just thinking aloud here - but how long should a team wait for one of
it's members before making that member's vote null, you have to bear in
mind here the length of a support cycle, at 6 months should we wait for
someone taking 4 months to make a preference?
just a thought, provocative perhaps, but just a thought ;)
More information about the xubuntu-devel