[Sugar-devel] [IAEP] [SLOB] meeting reminder and some open issues to discuss

[Walter Bender]

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Dave Crossland <dave at lab6.com> wrote:

> Hi
>
> On 6 May 2016 at 10:35, Caryl Bigenho <cbigenho at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I am hoping all the differences have been ironed out and that my motions
> > receive a majority vote.
>
> I just checked
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/16jIFuZ9bX-Bv675BpA1KmcEcRcX4PRCOUEX0ICRUkOc/edit
> and it still has a lot of my suggestions to be reviewed by Caryl, and
> as she says,
>
> > I noticed, the last time I checked, amounts for $X and $Y had not been
> > discussed. They are an important part of the motion.
>
> So I don't the motion for a finance manager can be passed today.
>
> However, can SLOBs pass a motion at any time? (And so the monthly
> meetings are just to ensure no motions go undecided for more than a
> month?)
>
> If so then I hope Caryl can firm up the motion and it can be passed
> within May :)
>
> --
> Cheers
> Dave
>

I agree that there are a number of open issues in the motions. Re Motion 1,
I am on the fence about making it a paid position: I have seen no evidence
that that will make a difference, but I am willing to give it a shot. Re
Motion 2, I have asked for evidence that (1) we are solving a real problem
and (2) if it is not better to delegate low-volume/low-threshold spending
authority to the teams, where the knowledge resides. (For example, Bernie,
as head of the infrastructure team, could have unilaterally approved the
request for the domain name payment. He already has that authority.) I am
fine with the other two motions as written.

-walter

-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org
<http://www.sugarlabs.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20160506/acd73796/attachment.html>