On 09/01/2022 17:27, Lothar K. Becker wrote:
Both sentences imply that the ESC have in praxis a blocking veto,
independent of the decision by a board, for both procedures.
In general, I think it is wise when (re-)starting an engineering
project to get input from the engineering community who are represented
in the ESC.
Of course, the board is not obliged to do so, and it also appoints the
ESC itself. If necessary it can stack it with yes-people.
However, I would really suggest that making engineering decisions
against the advice of the leaders of the teams that do the work is
something that should give very serious pause for thought &
consideration by a board.
Or something like this. I am not sure if it is good to vote on it
without clarification of this item in any case. What do you think?
Clearly the board as the ultimately authority has many avenues to
ensure its will is done: changing the policy, changing the ESC
But as a general scheme of action for a peaceful and sensible approach
to the problem, I think the policy as proposed is fine.
email@example.com <><, GM Collabora Productivity
Hangout: firstname.lastname@example.org, Skype: mmeeks
(M) +44 7795 666 147 - timezone usually UK / Europe
To unsubscribe e-mail to: email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
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