On 08/07/2013 05:58 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Monty Taylor wrote: >> What if instead we had a repo with a bunch of ReStructureText in it - >> perhaps a copy of the TC charter and then a dir for additional things >> the TC has decided. That repo would be autopublished to a non-wiki >> website ... and the core team for the repo was the TC. EXCEPT, we didnt' >> do a 2 core +2 thing ... we'd have some slightly different rules. Such >> as - certain number of days it has to be open, certain number of +1 >> votes, etc. And then only the TC chair has the actual APRV vote, which >> is used to codify the vote tallies. > > I think that's a great idea, tracking revisions of proposed motions and > recording of the results/votes is not so great at this point. I would > still prefer to use the ML and the meeting to *discuss* the motion, but > tracking wording changes and approvals should be made easier.
Agree - I think the mailing list is a MUCH better general discussion medium. > A few questions: > * Chair can use APRV once the vote is over to indicate YES wins... how > to indicate that the vote is over and NO won ? Abandon the review ? Yeah. It's a review to change something that did not work. Abandon seems perfect. > * How do we handle proxies ? Giving temporary +2 to a non-TC member > sounds like a bit of pain I do not think we'd need proxies anymore - as the vote wouldn't have to happen within the IRC meeting. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
