On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 01:40:56PM +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > Dear TB > > This is not a technical topic, but a governance one on which I'd > appreciate your perspective. > > When we set all this up, we knew from observation that a code of conduct > and a firm governance structure would be important, and by and large I > think our arrangements in this regard have helped us balance complex > webs of interests for the best benefit of all participants in the project. > The CC plays a critical role in the project; a large part of their > responsibility is to act as a trusted and neutral arbiter of differences > between teams or individuals in Ubuntu. In addition to regular meetings > with different councils and team leads, and the running of the selection > processes for those teams the CC acts as a neutral trustee of the values > encoded in the CoC. There have been a number of occasions when > individuals have been asked to step down from positions of > responsibility or membership after complaints raised by one party > against another, arbitrated b the CC. > > It has been pointed out that a potential conflict of interest arises if > it is a member of the CC who is a party to such a dispute. We have > general guidance that a conflicted party should recuse themselves from > such deliberations. If it were a single member of the CC, then the > remainder could probably handle the issue in a way that was seen to be > independent. If however the issue is more systemic, then we might need > to bolster the ranks of those able to weigh in, independently. While the > general idea is that "appeal is to the BDFL", in some cases, I too might > be obviously conflicted on a matter. > > A suggestion to address this is that the TB, as a very well-respected > team that is elected with support of a broad segment of the project > (though not as broad as the CC), would be a useful source from which to > draw independent perspectives in such a corner case. > > The suggestion feels reasonable and appropriate to me. I think we would > all want to avoid an infinite loop of appeals, or the TB being drawn > into every matter on which the CC makes a tough decision, but I think in > the decade-long history of the project there have perhaps been only one > or two such issues and I think we would be able to scope this practice > to the simple case where there is no non-CC complainant , or where the > CC or substantial members of the CC are direct parties to a dispute. I > like the idea that, when needed, we would have an obvious and > pre-selected place to seek independent perspectives rather than me (as a > potentially conflicted party) having to constitute a fresh, independent > body. > > I am writing to see how you, as a representative TB, feel about the > proposal. If you are comfortable with handling such discussions in the > very unlikely event they were to occur, that would be sufficient support > for me to suggest it as a good practice to the CC for future reference. > As the project gets a little older, it's not inappropriate for us to > endeavour to be a little wiser too, so put this email in that bucket :) > > Mark
Hi Mark, I think that's a great idea and as a TB member, I'd certainly be happy to help in those rare cases. Stéphane
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- technical-board mailing list technical-board@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
