Il 12/11/2010 18.40, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto:
please read the first real draft of the Community Bylaws here:
I need some clarifications. :)
1) Quotation from the draft: "The Engineering Steering Committee (ESC)
is made of developers who are coopted (i.e, there's no need for election
and there can be as many members of the ESC as needed)."
question: *must* these developers be Foundation *members* at the same
possible issue: sponsored developers can be coopted by other developers
and their employer can gain more powers/rights other than the seat in
the Advisory Board.
possible solution: sponsor's paid developers shouldn't participate in
ESC as *single* persons. Contributions in their free time and following
cooptation in ESC should be carefully evaluated from BoD or Membership
2) Quotation from the draft: "Engineering Steering Committee [...] This
board is not elected but coopted by developers. There's no limit on the
number of members of the ESC."
Question: really no limit of members?! :)
possible issue: ESC members may coopt more developers just before the
Chairman's election by gaining so a impromptu and really unfair majority
in the special college for the Chairmain election's.
possible solution 1: the chairman's election is not done by a special
college, but according to a collective vote for each Committee (BoD, ESC
and AB), made from their members based on a list of candidates, proposed
or not by the committees themselves. There would be only 3 collective
votes expressed (quorum of 2 collective votes).
possible solution 2: ESC has a maximum and preventively known number of
members. The vote for this committee can be expressed from *members*
that have contributed code to the project. This system needs a
specification of "code contribution" and "role of sponsor's paid code
3) Quotations from the draft: "The board of directors appoints the
Membership Commitee and can form any other adhoc teams or committees if
needed. " and "The Engineering Steering Committee (ESC) [...] oversee
the election of the BoD"
Question: can the BoD in some "special" situation really form *any*
other committee, ESC included?
possible issue: the BoD declares that some "special" situation is met,
then it forms (or dissolves?) the ESC so that a new ESC "helps" the old
BoD members during the "overseeing" of the next BoD election.
possible solution: all Foundation members elect an independent committee
that guarantees the regularity of the BoD election.
***end of questions***
Furthermore, I think that the bylaws need more attention to *office
incompatibilities" and *conflict of interests* for internal members and
E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Community bylaws · Bernhard Dippold
Re: [steering-discuss] Community bylaws · Volker Merschmann
Re: [steering-discuss] Community bylaws · Gianluca Turconi
- Re: [steering-discuss] Community bylaws (continued)
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy