[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Proposal for a EPEL Steering Committee



Axel Thimm schrieb:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 06:53:07PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
>> Approving something require at least four Steering Committee members
>> to vote and the majority of the votes wins.
> Isn't that the same? The majority of 7 people is always 4+. Or are you
> saying that we need the majority to attend to a vote and of that
> majority again the majority?

The latter.

> The latter doesn't sound that good, as you would end up with passing
> votes that are less than the majority. I would strictly stick to
> having a majority quorum of positive votes compared to the full number
> of members, irrespective of how many are attending the voting.

I feared/fear that we run into situations where members simply are not
present in votings or not really responsive even on the list; to avoid
that I copied how FESCo works/worked afaics. But well, you have a point,
too. I'll remove that cornercase for now, but will bring that quickly
bring up as adjustments if my fears should become true. Does that sound
sane?

>>  * when FESCo member reads what the EPEL Steering Committee decided and
>> disagrees with that
> Since the decisions of this committee are reported and ratified by
> fesco, is this needed? This sounds like we do some work and get it
> approved by fesco. And then two weeks later a fesco member returns
> from vacation and quotes this sentence to undo everything.

It was more meant as clarification, but seems it is more confusing that
helping now that I look at it again. I'll take a look to make this more
clear later and will set a definite timeframe for a FESCo veto, to make
it more clear.

CU
thk


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]