Open Stack

On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 10:28 -0700, Joshua McKenty wrote:


> My only further concern is to make sure that, despite the convenience,
> each potential Bylaws change is structured as a separate redline, and
> voted on individually - both by the board, and by the membership.
> Specifically:
> 
> 
> 1. DefCore-related changes that clarify the meaning of core, and the
> difference between integrated release and project.
> 2. ATC-related changes that should be considered an amendment to the
> TC processes.
> 3. Legal Affairs committee changes.
> 4. Election reform (if we end up coming back to this one).
> 5. CLA reform (again, if it comes back in).
> 
> 
> Since I’ve seen scope creep on #2 and #3, I start to get worried about
> 4 and 5 - which would certainly nuke our chances of getting 1 through
> this window.

Yep, I was thinking the same. We should try to split up the bylaws
changes logically (much as developers do with patches) and have the
electorate vote on each logical change separately.

If we proposed all bylaws changes via a single vote and it got rejected,
we'd have no feedback on which aspects of the changes were most
troublesome.

Mark