-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The first goal of the Working Group process is to plan our governance process for future members of the Server Working Group. I think the place we should start is by gathering a list of requirements that a governance charter will need to keep in mind. I'll list my thoughts below, please raise your own concerns as well. In no particular order (stream of consciousness): == Voting Members == * Number of voting members for the Working Group. * How long a term do the voting members serve? * Should there be term limits or mandatory breaks? * Should there be reserved chairs for specific constituencies (e.g. QA, Ambassadors, Release Engineering)? * Voting method?[1] * Who can vote?[2] * Recalls? == Charter == * How do we approve the initial charter?[3] * How do we later amend the charter?[4] == My initial thoughts == I am open to counter-arguments, naturally. [1] For simplicity, I suspect we want to stick with range-voting as in the other elections. We already have the tools for this. [2] I recommend we stick with FPCA+1 as a rule for voting. [3] For the initial charter, I think if it's not unanimous, we need to keep talking. [4] I think amendments should require "voting members - 1". It shouldn't be possible for a single dissenting vote to hold things up (they should get to have their say), but otherwise I think that a near-unanimous vote should be required to change the fundamental guiding document.