This is a great plan IMO (with discussion whenever someone leaves
mozilla). Thanks Mitchell and bsmedberg for pushing for this!

- jst


On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Jet Villegas <[email protected]> wrote:
> SGTM.
>
> --Jet
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Mitchell Baker <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 10/21/15 2:17 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Gervase Markham <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> When a Module Owner is also a Mozilla employee who then leaves Mozilla,
>>>>> it
>>>>> seems prudent that their Module Ownership is relinquished.
>>>>>
>>>> I would be very uneasy with this being the default. Module Ownership is
>>>> a Mozilla project position, and does not come with or go with employment
>>>> by any particular entity, MoCo/MoFo included. This is one of the key
>>>> distinctions which makes the Module Ownership system different from the
>>>> MoCo org chart.
>>>>
>>> Absolutely agree with Gerv here.
>>>
>>> That said, I think it would be worth being better at asking departing
>>> employees if they want to retain module ownership/peership.
>>>
>>> I think quite often people leaving mozilla end up not staying involved
>>> enough that it makes sense for them to remain owners/peers. So
>>> changing jobs is a good time to ask what their plans are.
>>>
>>> But, I definitely think that the default should be that people retain
>>> their module position.
>>>
>>> / Jonas
>>>
>>
>> I'll make another pitch for my proposal that we have a firm requirement
>> for a discussion when employee owners leave mozilla, and a follow up at a
>> set time after that.
>>
>> ml
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Reply via email to