[TC] Right-sizing the Technical Committee

Zane Bitter zbitter at redhat.com
Thu Dec 5 14:05:20 UTC 2019

On 5/12/19 6:26 am, Jean-Philippe Evrard wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-12-04 at 22:18 -0500, Zane Bitter wrote:
>> On 4/12/19 6:50 pm, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>>> Tangential to election scheduling but still on the topic of
>>> election
>>> planning, last cycle a bunch of folks jumped on the "let's shrink
>>> the TC!" bandwagon *while* the election process was already
>>> underway. That was of course not an appropriate time to talk about
>>> changes to election parameters. But now(ish) *is* the right time.
>>> So to reopen that discussion we previously put a pin in, how many
>>> TC
>>> seats should we fill in the coming election, and how many should we
>>> delete? There were a few different suggestions, some following a
>>> less aggressive timeline than others. We would normally have 7
>>> seats
>>> up for grabs in the coming round... do we reduce it to 6 (and work
>>> with an even-number-sized TC), or just 5 (targeting a TC of 11 for
>>> Ussuri into "V")? Or something even more drastic like just letting
>>> them all expire and filling none, immediately down-sizing to a TC
>>> of
>>> 6 members? Thoughts?
>> This is pretty well-settled:
>> https://review.opendev.org/681266
>> (At least assuming we ignore the fact that JP merged it when it had
>> only
>> 8 of the 9 required votes, which I only just noticed. Naughty JP.)
> You know I like being naughty!
> However, I don't think I was it this time: For a TC of 13 members, 7 is
> the simple majority. We had consensus too :)

But amending the charter itself requires 2/3 majority:


> I wrote this email to (shameless plug) remind that only 5 votes are
> technically required for motions when we have 13 members [1], but I
> generally try to reach the simple majority if possible.
> Regards,
> JP
> [1]: https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/charter.html#motions

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list