On 20/02/13 05:59, Lukas Blakk wrote: > If the chair of the council is a rotating position, I am a bit > concerned about module ownership churn. Most of our module owners > seem to get the position and then stay attached to their module(s) > for a fairly long time.
Do you think there is a valid distinction here between code and non-code modules? Clearly there's advantage to a code module owner being in place for a long time. Is that equally true of all non-code modules? In this case, it's effectively that a different peer becomes owner in each period, then goes back to being a peer. > than "the current chair" if that position rotates often and I'm not > sure what that would look like. Perhaps the current and most recent > former chair so that there's some coverage from the past at the same > time? Can someone remind us of the frequency with which the chairmanship rotates? Gerv _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
