Re: [tsc-devel] RFC: Voting rules draft

Chris Jacobsen | Fri, 07 Aug 2015 17:23:49 UTC

> But as said, currently I think the one about the voting procedure is

enough.

We can just use the voting document for now unless/until we determine more documents are needed.
We can always revisit this later if needed.

> Can we change “administrator” to “project lead”? Not that I want to be
of importance, but the term “administrator” is used nowhere else in the
document, and the administrative tasks in the project are usually duty
of the project lead. The document also says that if the project lead is
unavailable the assistant lead takes over, so I don’t think we’re going
to fall into a gap then. Having the entire document using the same terms
will prevent confusion on its contents.


In the long run, I think we need three people with this access.  Having two means someone usually can be reached.
Having 3 means it is very unlikely no one can be reached.  It's the same rationale as when I originally suggested
having at least three people with server root access.  I'd suggest having this standard for all types of access and
all resources (server ownership, domain ownership, etc).

It does not matter whether it is termed "project lead" or "administrator" as long as the redundancy is there (though
you are correct the document should be consistent).  If the project explodes in the number of contributors, we may
eventually need even more people, but three people will probably work for a long time.

-datahead