Re: Planning releases

I think Joe suggested that maybe such a committee would report directly to the
members, but I'm not a big fan of creating too many layers of structure that all
need to be elected etc.   So I was kind of thinking it'd be more like a committee
appointed by the board that would be in charge of releases.  So the board would
then focus on the corporate/pr/funding issues and the committee would then oversee
releases.  And so the committee is created by the board and doesn't necessarily
need to be in the bylaws.


Havoc Pennington wrote:

> Bart Decrem <> writes:
> >
> > Would the solution be to have a Releases Committee that reports to the board?
> >
> This seems to be just creating another board. (I mean, you have to
> elect the release committee, define their powers, etc., just as you do
> for the board. So any objections that apply to the board also apply to
> the release committee. Right?)
> If we're going to have a small group work on this, is there a reason
> to make a different body from the board responsible? What does the
> separation achieve - would different people be in each group, or would
> it just be twice as many meetings for the same core developers?
> Of course, the board doesn't have to do everything it's responsible
> for personally; they could delegate to volunteers or whatever. But if
> the board implemented its responsibility for releases via a committee,
> that wouldn't be institutionalized in the bylaws, I wouldn't think.
> Havoc

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]