Revised RFC 1 - Need Comments

[Daniel Morissette]

Howard Butler wrote:
> At 02:22 PM 10/11/2006, Bart van den Eijnden (OSGIS) wrote:
>> I don't know about the maximum of 2 years though, I have no problem 
>> with anybody sitting longer on the PSC as long as they are still 
>> active in the project and play their role well. It might be good to 
>> involve new people once in a while though.
> 
> I must not have been clear.  It was a recurring 2 year term, not a 
> maximum.  You could be elected for as many terms as you can stand :)
> 

I'm not too keen on the 2 year term either. My main concern is that 
continuity is important for the direction of a project to remain 
consistent. If over a couple of election cycles most of the PSC ends up 
being replaced then you lose all track of the historical background and 
nobody will know the reasons why things were done one way or another and 
you end up with the new PSC members making decisions that may be 
contrary to the original design goals.

Is it any good for MapServer if Steve is not re-elected on the PSC when 
his term is up, or for GDAL if Frank is not re-elected on the GDAL PSC 
if that PSC was setup to work this way?

Why would Frank or Steve not be re-elected you ask? With an open 
community vote, what would prevent a large group (or even an unfriendly 
proprietary corporation) from filing a bunch of non-anonimous votes and 
taking over the PSC over a couple of election cycles?

I guess I'm with Frank and have a preference for the 
self-perpetuating-cabal.

Daniel
-- 
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/