Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Robin Cook <rcook AT wyrms.net>]

Are you adding this if not then that is not what I read in your two
attachments.
Also if your two document are summaries then I would want to see the
whole proposal in it's current completed form as I don't remember seeing
a full proposal in the previous discussion.  And please don't tell me
it's on the wiki as half the time I can't find what I am looking for on
it.

CuZnDragon
Robin Cook

On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 19:15 -0500, Jeremy Blosser (emrys) wrote:
> Any lead can be removed by a super majority vote of regular developers.
> The process is defined as:
> 
> 1) any developer (lead or not) moves that a lead be removed
> 2) any developer seconds this motion
> 3) there is a vote of the leads only
> 4) if the leads don't vote to remove via a super majority (67%), any
>    developer can move for a veto
> 5) the motion to veto is seconded
> 6) there is a vote of the non-leads only
> 7) if the (non-lead) developers vote via a super majority (67%) to remove
>    the Lead, they are removed
> 
> Yes, this is a lot of steps, but it's also completely defined and therefore
> not very subject to whims.
> 
> If people think we need to establish a regular renewal vote for general
> leads we can look at it, I started to write that but didn't want us to get
> buried in an election every month.  You also get into weird logistics about
> how to handle a component lead who fails their regular lead revote, or if
> component leads have both votes each year or just one, etc.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part