Hello! Noé Lopez <[email protected]> skribis:
>> Updating the GCD process itself (the topic of this thread), doing >> bookkeeping, ensuring that things move forward (what happened to the GCD >> about the bootloader API?). >> >> Ludo’. > > Makes sense, although I thought that the last one was already the > responsibility of the sponsors. True. > It seems to me though that this is not what happened in reality. This is > just a feeling and I have no data to backup this claim. > > I think the idea of a GCD team is good, you can count me in (after the > release is done 😅). But I’d like to keep its responsibilities as low as > possible, to avoid team members having increased influence on GCDs. Yes, I think it’s mostly for things like updating the GCD process, keeping track of deliberations, following up on things. > Anyhow, here’s my ideas for improvement of the process: > > - Reinforce the role of sponsors as timekeepers and consensus > facilitators, to ensure that discussions are always moving towards > consensus. > > - Provide mail templates to clarify the roles of everyone and what is > expected at each step. For example to clarify that the submission > period is not for discussion. > > WDYT? Sounds great to me! Thanks, Ludo’.
