On 3/13/17 3:28 PM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > A lead is only needed if the team can't get a decision. > > Saying that the team could call for re-election if they don't like > lead's decision is ridiculous from my view: Like said it isn't the lead > who controls the direction. It is the lead who should step down if > he/she doesn't feel comfortable with the team decision and no longer > wants to represent the project anymore because he/she disagree so much > with the team decision.
The security team has always worked in a process where the direction of the team (with the leads) has always been decided as a team. Based on reading the GLEP it is the goal of it to assign responsibility and not to take control away from the other team members. We have always discussed and voted on things in full disclosure. I see nothing changing from the way we do things, and nothing is changing from the way it is, projects have leads. People vote on project leads, the security team has had and voted on project leads for a long time before. There were two before, Alex and Tobias. Making it one or two is a decision that can easily be discussed. Making it 15 leads just does not work.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
