Hi,
To this effect. An appointed size was agreed. I think it makes sense to run a
new election for that seat – continuing with the previous voting list does not
take into account the current situation, as the voting was in the context of an
earlier situation:
We need to take into account two situations as I see it:
* Any TSC member is no longer able to support the role
* The TSC member that can no longer support the role is a chair or vice
chair.
* We need to cater for the appointed positions as well.
To this effect, can we amend the community charter as follows:
* Add to section 4.2.3:
* 4.2.3.3 TSC member abdication
* In the event of a TSC member no longer being able to continue being
a member of the TSC:
* If the TSC position was from an operator, the operator may
appoint a member that fulfils the criteria of being an active member; if that
is not feasible then the operator may appoint any member. If this is not done,
then the seat is considered vacant. (Additional amendment to consider: If the
TSC member that abdicated continues as an active member from the same company,
then the TSC seat is considered vacant (I am not stronge on this, it just to
avoid using this clause as a means to replace TSC members).
* If the TSC position is from one of the elected positions, an
election for that single position is held. The conditions of the election are
the same as for any TSC election.
* If the said position was of that of a TSC chair or vice-chair, then
the TSC chair or vice chair position will undergo a re-election after the
successful appointment of the new TSC member.
* When the next General TSC election is held, the said TSC position
will also be included in the general TSC election.
BR,
Steve
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Frank
Brockners via Lists.Onap.Org
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2018 7:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Seat Vanacy
Hi Kenny,
Thanks for the summary. As a community member, I’d prefer if the TSC would
quickly amend the current charter to cover the case of TSC members stepping
down from their role. Any other approach would be a shot from the hip – and
might be in conflict to the ultimate policy that the TSC would come up with.
The amendment should cover the considerations that you list below, especially
the fact that the TSC now consists of elected members and not representatives
of parties, companies, etc. In that, a TSC differs from most of the
parliaments, where members often represent parties, so that successors are
automatically picked from a list.
Regards,
Frank
From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Kenny
Paul
Sent: Sonntag, 23. September 2018 18:43
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [onap-tsc] TSC Seat Vanacy
I wanted to follow up on the discussion regarding a special election due to
Chris taking a new job. One of the first questions asked was, "What does the
Charter say?" Neither the Charter or Community Document says anything about a
vacancy. In the absence of any specific language, the default should be to
honor what language there is. Currently the Community Document says:
4.1.1.2 Size and Structure
The TSC shall consist of eighteen (18) seats
Nine (9) seats on the TSC are to be reserved for Operators
Only one (1) person from any company, or group of related companies (as defined
in section 4.4.4.1) may be a member at any given time.
As such, my guidance to the TSC is to immediately authorize a special election
using the criteria currently defined in the Community Document, plain and
simple.
There were a several alternatives to a special election which have been
suggested. While it is well within the TSC's right to pursue any of these
alternatives, all must be thoroughly scrutinized through the lens of fairness,
trust, and responsibility to the community.
* Leaving the seat vacant until the next election cycle
It took 6 months to debate and vote on membership criteria, and another full
month to run an election. Leaving the seat vacant until the next scheduled
election implies that after all that work the TSC doesn't care about being
fully functional. This would be a huge hit to the community's trust of the TSC.
* Delay any decision on an election until the TSC amends the Community
Document to address how to handle a vacancy
This is marginally better than leaving the seat vacant, because who knows how
long amending the Community Document might take. I would encourage the TSC to
take up amending the Community Document to cover one or more of the operational
and governance gaps that exist, however it is unfair to the ONAP community to
hold the recently vacated seat hostage to those discussions.
* Have Chris appoint his replacement
When the TSC was comprised of only appointed individuals doing this would have
been fine course of action. In fact, there were a couple instances back in
March where this occurred. Now that we have moved from an appointed TSC to an
elected TSC, such an appointment by a member is completely inappropriate.
* Make the next runner up in the August election the new TSC member
While true the seat does not belong to Huawei, it would be exceeding unfair to
them, especially as the 2nd largest contributor to the Project, to suddenly be
out in the cold with absolutely no chance to even compete for a seat they once
held.
I don't like creating work for myself and a TCS election is indeed a great deal
of work. The thought of having to run a new election is mind-numbing but I
welcome it gladly because it is absolutely the right thing to do.
I recommend a one week nomination period, and a one week voting period. (The
prior election was lengthened to two + two specifically to accommodate summer
vacations). I am at ONS-Europe this week and out the first week of October on
family business. The earliest I can commit to kicking off the process (after
revalidating qualified Active Community Members) would be Oct. 11th, putting
the close of the election on Oct. 25.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Best Regards,
-kenny
Kenny Paul, Technical Program Manager, The Linux Foundation
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>, 510.766.5945
San Francisco Bay Area, Pacific Time Zone
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#3742): https://lists.onap.org/g/ONAP-TSC/message/3742
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26151620/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/ONAP-TSC/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
