Amend the governance document #10137
Conversation
|
Review period will end on 2020-12-25 at 17:50:38 UTC. |
BrewTestBot
added
the
waiting for feedback
|
Review period ended. |
BrewTestBot
removed
the
waiting for feedback
Co-authored-by: Colin Dean <colindean@users.noreply.github.com>
CC @Homebrew/members who may not have seen the above. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see @BrewTestBot has voted, which makes them a Homebrew member in their own right. I welcome this progressive view on robots rights 😄
|
|
||
| 5. A technical decision of the Project Leader may be overruled by an ordinary resolution of the TSC. | ||
|
|
||
| 6. A non-technical decision of the Project Leader may be overruled by an ordinary resolution of the PLC. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should there be a definition of what a technical decision/matter/question/dispute is? For instance, what if there were a dispute over whether an issue is technical?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For instance, what if there were a dispute over whether an issue is technical?
That would be a highly specific case, in that it would need to be a decision made by the Project Leader that either the PLC or TSC would want to overrule but the other committee wouldn’t want to (because if both agree, the distinction wouldn’t matter).
That seems unlikely to me, and that if it ever happened we could revert to a vote by all maintainers on if the dispute is of a technical nature or not, at which point we’d be able to use that experience to build a proper definition which fit Homebrew.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That would be a highly specific case
This is true for items 6.5 and 6.6. Note, however, that TSC jurisdiction over technical issues is relevant not only for decisions made by the Project Leader but also for those between members. See 7.1 and 7.3 below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm approving as I'm happy with the document in its current state.
Here are a few additional comments/suggestions. I'd like to see them make it in but will not vote against it if they don't. If any warrant a new PR, I'm happy to open one.
Item 5.3
- A majority of the entire membership of the PLC is required to pass an ordinary resolution.
Is it necessary to include this given the new definition for an "ordinary resolution"?
Item 5.6
- Any member may refer any question or dispute to the PLC. All technical matters should first be referred to the TSC. Non-technical matters may be referred directly to the PLC. Members will make a good faith effort to resolve any disputes prior to referral to the PLC.
Two comments about this. First, doesn't this belong in section 4 ("Project Leadership Committee") rather than section 5 ("Meetings of the Project Leadership Committee")? I don't think it's not really about meetings. This isn't directly related to the other changes in this PR so it may not be appropriate here.
Second, should the "with compromise" phrase that was added to item 7.3 (which is essentially the TSC equivalent of 5.6) be added here as well?
|
UPDATE: Calendar made public so that button and google calendar link should now work in addition to the .ics file. Here is a link to add the Thu 2021-Jan-14 20:00 UTC extraordinary meeting of the membership described in the PR description to your google calendar: And if you prefer a fancy button: And here is an .ics file renamed to be .txt if you don't use Google calendar: |
|
|
||
| 2. The PLC will appoint between three and five members to the TSC. The Project Leader must be one of these appointees. Appointed TSC members will serve a term of one year or until the member's successor is appointed. | ||
| 2. The PLC will appoint between three and five members to the TSC. The Project Leader must be one of these appointees. After the 2021 AGM, PLC members should not be any of these appointees. Appointed TSC members will serve a term of one year or until the member's successor is appointed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I already commented on this before: Given the different tasks of the PLC and TSC, I don't see why one cannot serve on both. If we want to avoid the conflict of interest of PLC members appointing themselves to the TLC, I suggest:
| 2. The PLC will appoint between three and five members to the TSC. The Project Leader must be one of these appointees. After the 2021 AGM, PLC members should not be any of these appointees. Appointed TSC members will serve a term of one year or until the member's successor is appointed. | |
| 2. The TSC consists of five members. Committee members are elected by majority vote of Homebrew members. Each TSC member will serve a term of one year or until the member's successor is elected. Any sudden vacancy in the TSC will be filled by the usual procedure for electing TSC members at the next general meeting, typically the next AGM. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the idea is that the PLC and TSC should be empowered to disagree with each other. That gets kinda awkward if one is on both.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The duties of the PLC and TSC don't overlap so I'm not sure in what scenario they would disagree with each other.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In practice currently, perhaps. But the roles and responsibilities of the PLC and TSC aren't really clearly defined here, so there's no guarantee that they'd stay that way.
That said, I'm not sure non-overlapping duties necessarily preclude disagreement either. Think of, for instance, different branches of government, or, say, management vs the board of directors in a corporation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This still allows members to be in both groups. It just expresses a preference for this not to be the case. This is why it uses "should" instead of "must".
If there is a good reason for a member to occupy two seats in Homebrew's governance we can still pick that option.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel like there should not be overlap between PLC and TSC because we have enough maintainers to avoid people needing to do both and they are pretty different roles.
Change "majority vote" to "ordinary resolution". Change "Project Leadership Committee" to "PLC". Add "with compromise".
sjackman
force-pushed
the
sj/governance
branch
from
159a0e8 to
17c2598
Compare
|
Abridged minutes of the EGM held on 2020-01-14. |
Summary of the changes
ordinary resolutionandspecial resolution.An extraordinary general meeting of the membership will be held on Thu 2021-Jan-14 20:00 UTC on Slack. The purpose of this meeting is to vote on a special resoultion to amend the governance document as per this PR. It is not necessary to attend this meeting in person. You may vote by proxy at any time in advance of this meeting. Please vote by either approving this PR to vote for this resolution, or request changes to vote against this resolution.