On 18/04/13 14:38, Mike Connor wrote: > How to incorporate non-technical decision makers has been a > long-running discussion (I remember discussing potential models with > Mitchell and Brendan as far back as 2007).
We are not trying to solve that problem in general, and anyway it's been solved for areas which are solely non-technical by the creation of Activity Modules. > While I'd love to see it > resolved, I agree with Gavin that it should not block creation of > these modules. I believe the status quo (which is generally working) > is less risky than imposing a new model in a hurry, but I'd love to > work on a better solution. I don't think that "the status quo" is that "the technical owner is the final decision-maker", which would be implied if we created these modules to cover each web property without at least a slot for "content owner". > stakeholders, such as Asa. In this case of these new modules, I > would expect that the same principles would apply, and that the > module owners being nominated are aware of their responsibilities to > engage and work with key stakeholders across the project. I trust > Mike Morgan to make the right recommendations and ensure that the > module owners (as currently defined) will act in appropriate ways. I think saying that the person responsible for the technical running of the site is "the module owner (as currently defined)" is begging the question (in the correct sense of that phrase). Gerv _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
