On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 08:14:08AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > While I agree that a hard requirement might be too strong (I can think of > MOTU > who choose not to apply for core-dev for social reasons and people with the > technical background to be core-dev, but who choose not to based on principle > of least access (mdz, for example) and a perhaps a few others), it is > important that the Technical Board be, well technical. If you look at the > things we expect a core-dev to know, I think they kinds of things that SHOULD > be pre-requisites for being on the Tech Board. > > Mark can nominate who he wants, of course, but I think that Tech Board > members > who don't meet reasonable technical standards will undermine the perceived > legitimacy of the Tech Board with the broader development community. > > Modulo a few exceptions, I think Micah's suggestion is a good one.
Perhaps it would be sufficient to allow the development community to set their own standards of legitimacy by way of the votes they cast? As long as the nominee pool contains some electable core developers (which seems likely), then it kind of seems to me that this should work out on its own. -- Colin Watson [[email protected]] -- technical-board mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
