Kevin L. Mitchell wrote: > On Mon, 2014-11-17 at 17:25 +0000, Hayes, Graham wrote: >> Quite often people will come forward in a vacuum - people who thought >> they were not right for the job, or felt that someone else would suit >> the role better can come forward in a by-election. (I only have >> anecdotal evidence for this, but it is first hand, based on other >> voluntary, self organising groups I have been part of, and run elections >> for over the years). >> >> I would suggest when nominations close with no candidates, they re-open >> immediately for one week, at with point, if there is no candidates I >> goes to the TC. > > While I think the point is valid, an alternate process would be for the > election coordinator(s) to point out the lack of candidates and issue a > reminder for the procedure a certain amount of time prior to the end of > the nomination period. Say, if no candidates have been put forward with > 3 days left in the nomination period, then the election coordinator > would send out the appropriate reminder email. I think this would have > the same effect as the one week re-open period without delaying the > election process.
Also "delaying the elections for one week" puts additional stress on the design summit organization (the newly-elected PTL is responsible for organizing his program sessions there). Any solution that doesn't delay significantly the determination of the PTL should therefore be preferred. Note that if nobody showed up at the end of the nomination period, *anyone* placing their self-nomination email in the last minute would get automatically elected without an election having to happen. So I don't think it's completely crazy to let the TC take over the orphaned project and seek/encourage someone to fill the PTL shoes if nobody placed their nomination in the time allocated for it. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackemail@example.com http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev