Open Stack

On 2019-12-06 12:54:00 -0600 (-0600), Jay Bryant wrote:
> <snip>
> > The point I was making in another fork of this thread was to tie the
> > exact term length to the election timing and only state approximate
> > lengths here, ie including 'minimum' in the above will still set a bound
> > that complicates accommodating another slightly smaller than usual
> > cycle.
> > 
> </snip>
> 
> I am in agreement with Dean that the easiest and most flexible
> solution is to tie the term lengths to the elections and not state
> a particular minimum or maximum.
[...]

Does this satisfy what's required by the bylaws though?

    the term for the members of the Technical Committee shall be
    approved by a majority of the Technical Committee (“Term”) and
    shall be published publicly before each Technical Committee
    election; if no such Term is published the Term will be twelve
    calendar months.

    https://www.openstack.org/legal/technical-committee-member-policy/

I guess it doesn't *strictly* require a term duration to be
specified as an explicit measure of time, so it's possible to
interpret it as allowing terms to be defined according to some other
criteria as long as they don't also exceed 16 months.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 963 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20191206/e5c91475/attachment-0001.sig>