[PySoy-Dev] more on the re-org
betanull at gmail.com
Wed Dec 20 19:41:32 EST 2006
This email has clarification that's addressing everyone
On 12/20/06, Buddha Buck <blaisepascal at gmail.com> wrote:
> There can be an unlimited number of "Contributors".
> The number of "Leads" is set by the board, presumably based on areas
> of activity (i.e., if the board decides the design of PySoy is
> essentially in 5 semi-independent pieces, they may declare there to be
> five "Leads".
Both contributing and lead developers are unlimited since unlike the board
there are not X slots to be filled. The reason lead developers need board
nomination is the board manages the definition of components but I wanted
all developers involved when a new component is created. When a new lead is
being voted on by all developers the developers are also voting to create a
Say a current lead developer is managing the "audio" component and has one
specific contributor doing most of the work on a new sound effects system.
That contributor would likely be nominated to become a lead for a new sound
FX system, thus, making that no longer part of the audio lead's component.
If the new lead steps down the board may decide to move that component back
under the umbrella of "audio" or the board may temporarily assign an
existing lead to that component until another can be elected.
In most cases components equal files, groups of files, or directories. The
code for the audio system is in one directory. The code for rendering in
another. Under this proposal lead developers are given authority over their
component, so it's as if each lead is a sub-maintainer.
one of the directors says "You know what, between my job and my
> new-born daughter, I can't really commit as much time to PySoy as I
> had been, and I need to step down as director and lead.", I see two
> votes being held: one to replace his position as Developer and one to
> replace his position as Lead.
What would happen in that case is the component he managed would either be
merged with another component or a new lead developer found for it. Empty
seats on the board do not need to be filled immediatly, either, and this is
also the case with many NGOs.
> Voting: I am uncertain of the mechanisms of voting. Say one lead
> says they are willing to step into a directorship. Do they
> automatically "win", or do they have to get 50% of the existing
> directors to approve them?
A member of the current board would first have to nominate them. This allows
the board to protect itself against people who may be good developers but
otherwise difficult to work with. Then a nomination would have to be
approved by the developers.
The section on attaining director rank has a typo, it should read "All
developers (excluding those Leads being voted on)". Having only board voting
on new board members would be redundant and make the board no longer
representitive of the pySoy developers.
My idea with the ranks was to give us a sane hybrid between direct democracy
when we can and representitive democracy when we must. If we did everything
by pure direct democracy nobody would be working on code anymore because
we'd be engaged in a constant debate over trivial details.
Is voting to raise done by "approval"
> (i.e., if there are multiple candidates, can I say "yes" to more than
> one, or am I limited to just one)?
My idea was that everyone votes yes/no for each canidate except the
canidates themselves. If the canidate with the most yes votes has more yes
votes than no votes, he wins. This needs to be clarified better on the
I think this is easier to implement than the instant runoff voting system
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the PySoy-dev