On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 12:18 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: [..] > So I think the key question is whether the TC should be considered "the > college of the PTLs + a number of extra elected people", or "whoever the > technical contributors elect for the job, who may or may not also be PTLs". [..]
Nice summary. Interested folks can also read the debate at last night's PPB meeting: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack-meeting/2012/openstack-meeting.2012-06-19-20.00.log.html I completely buy your argument that all seats should be elected. And I also expect that most PTLs would be elected. Put it this way - with the "all seats are elected" model, a voting contributor gets to weigh up the likely contribution to the committee of a given PTL versus other non-PTL candidates. I think that's healthy. Related, I think the committee should be making more of an effort to encourage "rough consensus" in the community on the matters under their consideration. IMHO, committee members should be voting on "is there a workable rough consensus on this matter?" rather than voting based purely on their own personal opinion. If that was the case, any PTL who was constructively engaging in a debate and helping to reach a consensus would have no fear of being ignored. Cheers, Mark. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc Post to : openstack-poc@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-poc More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
