How about modeling something after the ARC opinion review
process:
A new policy is proposed by/for the OGB.
A docket slot is created by the OGB (i.e., OGB/2007/001)
and the proposal + docket number is sent to the entire
OS.o Membership, with directions that any and all
discussion about this new policy be held on the
OGB-discuss alias.
Meetings happen, email discussions happen, etc that
result in an OGB vote to approve some new policy.
The OGB member responsible for the policy produces
a "final draft" of the policy that incorporates all
the things that were part of the vote and sends it out
to the OGB alias for a 1-week review by OGB members.
Any feedback during that week gets fed back into the
final draft as needed; such feedback+revisions could
(but does not normally) extend the review timer.
After the week of OGB review, the policy is sent to
the OS.o Membership for their review, with the reminder
that the time for discussion about the issues /behind/
the policy has been concluded and this review is strictly
about the document itself.
After a week of Community review, the policy is posted,
published and put into force...
-John
Eric Boutilier wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Stephen Lau wrote:
>> In reference to Alan Burlison's post from last Thursday:
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2007-May/030537.html
>>
>>
>>
>> It does seem to be somewhat conflicting that section 6.1 states that
>> the OGB has the power to manage the business and affairs of the
>> OpenSolaris Community, while section 3.1 states that Members have the
>> right to vote on Community-wide decisions.
>>
>> Alan's post was in reference to the new project instantiation policy
>> the OGB approved as OGB/2007/001.
>>
>> Should the policy be put in place based on the OGB vote of approval?
>> Or should it be put to a community-wide vote?
>
> I fear that community-wide vote on this would be overkill and
> would set a troubling precedent. Instead, I like the idea of
> coming up with a better way to ensure wider review during the
> discussion phase.
>
> Eric
>
>
>>
>> The bigger issue is: Alan is right, we do need a clearer demarcation
>> of what the OGB has the responsibility to do, and what needs approval
>> from the larger community.
>>
>> cheers,
>> steve
>> --
>> stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net
>> opensolaris // solaris kernel development
>> _______________________________________________
>> ogb-discuss mailing list
>> ogb-discuss at opensolaris.org
>> http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss
>>
> _______________________________________________
> ogb-discuss mailing list
> ogb-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss
