Re: Draft revision of Community Doc (Governance)

Edward Warnicke


Thank you very much for catching the omission with regard to the Core Project PTL being able to appoint an alternate Member.  I believe I have updated to fix that.

With regard to your other point on resolving situations that might otherwise lead to violating the

> No more than 50% of the TSC seats may be held by persons employed by the same company.

rule.  I have replaced that line with:

> No Member may be admitted to the TSC if their admission would cause the percentage of TSC seats held by persons employed by the same company to exceed 50%.

It is my belief that this should be sufficient to resolve such issues.


On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 4:15 AM Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECH SRO at Cisco) <vrpolak@...> wrote:

> TSC Membership shall consist of:

> Core project’s Project Technical Leaders (PTLs).


I vaguely remember we want to allow PTL

to select another person to represent the project in TSC.

It may be important as it relates to:


> No more than 50% of the TSC seats may be held by persons employed by the same company.


It is not clear how this rule interacts with other rules.


I mean, for a single selection replacing old TSC members

with the same number of new TSC members, the multiple-candidates methods

can be understood as selecting new members "one by one",

so it is straightforward to track when a company hits the limit

(so its remaining candidates are not eligible from that point on).


But what about situations when number of TSC members decreases

(e.g. a TSC appointed member seat expiring, or a legacy member revisited)?

What if a TSC member suddenly steps down

(election for the replacement takes time)?

Or when a member changes without large enough election

(e.g. a new PTL selected by a project, or a new project becoming core)?


Some projects have secondary documents handling edge cases

(ODL has rules [1] on how to honor the company cap

when running multiple elections at once).

But for now, I think it would be better to just

add a sentence about (old) TSC members voting

on how to resolve such unforeseen rule interactions.






From: tsc@... <tsc@...> On Behalf Of Edward Warnicke
Sent: Thursday, 2021-May-20 20:38
To: tsc@...; vpp-dev <vpp-dev@...>; csit-dev@...; cicn-dev@...; hicn-dev@...
Subject: [tsc] Draft revision of Community Doc (Governance)


As part of the ongoing discussion around evolving the TSC, and in keeping with the previously socialized slide deck.  Please provide feedback on this PR to update the Community Doc (our governance doc for how we do things like Elect TSC members).



Join { to automatically receive all group messages.