(Created page with "NOTE: DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT == Fedora Workstation WG Governance == This document describes the governing structure for the Fedora Workstation Work Group. === Membership =...") |
(make abstaining votes a bit more explicit) |
||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
Many of our decisions can be made through "lazy consensus";. Under this model, an intended action is announced on the mailing list, discussed, and in the absence of a group of dissenting contributors within a few days, simply done. | Many of our decisions can be made through "lazy consensus";. Under this model, an intended action is announced on the mailing list, discussed, and in the absence of a group of dissenting contributors within a few days, simply done. | ||
For bigger issues, where there may be disagreement, or where there is long-term impact, or where an action may not easily be undone, we will put forth a formal proposal on the mailing list with a "[Proposal for Vote] header in the email Subject: field. Working group members can vote +1 to approve, -1 to disagree, or 0 to abstain; a majority vote is necessary for a measure to pass. Members have one week to record their votes on an official proposal. Non-members may comment on the item and (of course) discuss on the mailing list, but are asked to refrain from putting votes on official proposal threads. | For bigger issues, where there may be disagreement, or where there is long-term impact, or where an action may not easily be undone, we will put forth a formal proposal on the mailing list with a "[Proposal for Vote] header in the email Subject: field. Working group members can vote +1 to approve, -1 to disagree, or 0 to abstain; a majority vote is necessary for a measure to pass with abstain votes not being included in the count. Members have one week to record their votes on an official proposal. Non-members may comment on the item and (of course) discuss on the mailing list, but are asked to refrain from putting votes on official proposal threads. | ||
In the event that a live meeting is held in IRC to discuss an issue, proposals will be done in much the same way. A member will put forth an official proposal by prefixing a summary of such with "Proposal:" and WG members will vote as above. Results will be recorded and posted in any meeting minutes. | In the event that a live meeting is held in IRC to discuss an issue, proposals will be done in much the same way. A member will put forth an official proposal by prefixing a summary of such with "Proposal:" and WG members will vote as above. Results will be recorded and posted in any meeting minutes. | ||
Revision as of 21:13, 14 November 2013
NOTE: DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT
Fedora Workstation WG Governance
This document describes the governing structure for the Fedora Workstation Work Group.
Membership
The Fedora Workstation Work Group has nine voting members, with one member selected by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee as the liaison to FESCo.
The FESCo liaison is always a member of the decision making group for the Work Group. The liaison is responsible for presenting the WG decisions and summary of WG discussions to FESCo on a regular basis. They will also take feedback or requirements from FESCo back to the WG. The liaison is not required to be a FESCo member, but should be able to regularly attend the FESCo meetings.
Members of the Work Group are chosen by the Work Group as seats become available. In the event that a current member relinquishes their seat, the Work Group will fill the seat by selecting a candidate and approving by majority consensus. Eligible candidates must be in the FPCA+1 group. The Work Group is highly encouraged to seek out candidates that have been showing persistent and high quality contribution to Workstation technology.
Current Members
- Josh Boyer (FESCo Liaison) (jwb)
- Matthias Clasen (mclasen)
- Kalev Lember (kalev)
- Ryan Lerch (ryanlerch)
- Jens Petersen (juhp)
- Christian Schaller (cschalle)
- Owen Taylor (otaylor)
- Lukáš Tinkl (ltinkl)
- Christoph Wickert (cwickert)
Making Decisions
Because Fedora is a global project, members of the working group may be distributed across multiple timezones. It may be possible to have a real-time IRC meetings, but in general we will conduct business on the mailing list.
Many of our decisions can be made through "lazy consensus";. Under this model, an intended action is announced on the mailing list, discussed, and in the absence of a group of dissenting contributors within a few days, simply done.
For bigger issues, where there may be disagreement, or where there is long-term impact, or where an action may not easily be undone, we will put forth a formal proposal on the mailing list with a "[Proposal for Vote] header in the email Subject: field. Working group members can vote +1 to approve, -1 to disagree, or 0 to abstain; a majority vote is necessary for a measure to pass with abstain votes not being included in the count. Members have one week to record their votes on an official proposal. Non-members may comment on the item and (of course) discuss on the mailing list, but are asked to refrain from putting votes on official proposal threads.
In the event that a live meeting is held in IRC to discuss an issue, proposals will be done in much the same way. A member will put forth an official proposal by prefixing a summary of such with "Proposal:" and WG members will vote as above. Results will be recorded and posted in any meeting minutes.
Changing these Rules
This document will be approved by consensus of the initial Working Group members and approved by FESCo. After initial ratification, any substantive changes can be approved by majority vote and sent to FESCo for acceptance.