Hacktoberfest 2026: le issue che i maintainer hanno segnato per ottobre, aperte e adatte ai principianti. Sfoglia le issue Hacktoberfest

TAG Appointment Process Shortcomings

Aperta
  • Qualcosa non va?
#809 25 commenti 2 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Valutazione

Difficoltà
5/5
Tempo stimato
Più di una settimana
Idoneità per principianti
20/100
Tipo di issue
Funzionalità
Chiarezza
Abbastanza chiara
Stato di attività
Ferma
Ambito
documentation

Direzione di ricerca

Inizia esaminando il processo esistente di nomina del TAG e le quattro modifiche proposte in questa issue: tempistiche, consultazione del TAG, tempo per la selezione dei candidati e mandati scaglionati. Il lavoro sarebbe completato quando fosse definito un processo concordato e aggiornato, inclusa la risoluzione delle preoccupazioni relative alla ratifica e alle tempistiche delle nomine.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

TAG Appointments

(I've already shared feedback along these lines with the Team.)

The obvious and stated purpose of TAG appointments is to address the innate drawbacks of an election process as far as diversity goes. It does not matter what aspect of diversity is considered, elections cannot produce multiple selections in a way that ensures that the set of selections maintains an appropriate amount of diversity. For instance, this year we have a troubling lack of women (though this is not the fault of the electors).

Having the Team be responsible for appointments on the same timeline as elections is a very poor design for several reasons.

There is insufficient time between the time that the election terminates and when the Team needs to make a decision. From my experience with the IETF NomCom, finding a substantive enough selection of people who are willing to serve in a position like this takes time, then it takes time to gather the information necessary to make a good decision. In this case, it will also take time to make a decision, as decisions need to be ratified by a supermajority of both the TAG and the AB[^1].

[^1]: A side note: I do not think that the AB has a role in making this particular decision. A more typical process is for the body itself to manage diversity appointments. If the goal is to ensure that the Team remains accountable to the membership for their choices, then put potential appointments up for comment and maybe objections (formal or otherwise) from the membership. I will open a separate issue to track this.

Six weeks is very much inadequate for this purpose, especially considering that this is over a holiday period in many parts of the world. I'm personally leaving on vacation soon and will not return before the end of the nomination period. I am sure that you will find it extraordinarily difficult to find good people.

As far as I can see, there is no formal reason for the elections to run so late in the term. You might say that if more time is needed, then the Team could schedule the election earlier so that there is more time for appointments.

I would argue instead that having elections conclude close to the time that a term starts is a good goal. Extending the period between election and term start makes it more likely that the election results become irrelevant, as those elected are more likely to have job changes or other life events that invalidate the results. The gap between election and term start should only allow enough time to manage the necessary logistical functions and for those elected to transition work as needed. Six weeks is about right for this purpose, four would be better, but that timing doesn't work. Note also that this settling period would not be available to appointees no matter how long that period is for elected members.

The other reason that this process is not ideal is that it takes very little account of what the TAG - the group to which the appointment is being made - needs. Though the new TAG votes on any decision, I would argue that consultation with the TAG is paramount before the appointment process starts. For new TAG members like myself, I have very little information about my soon-to-be colleagues and their strengths. I am not confident of being able to make an informed decision if an appointment is put to the vote.

My suggestion therefore is this:

  1. Start the appointment process a short period after the new TAG is seated.
  2. Consult the TAG about what you think their needs are and be guided by what they have to say about the gaps that need to be addressed.
  3. Run the appointment process on a schedule that ensures that the Team are able to find good candidates.
  4. Have the terms for appointments staggered relative to elected appointments. I would say that a reasonable timeline for the entire process would be at least three months, so that would have appointed members join the TAG around May or June.
Lingua principale
HTML
Stelle
263
Fork
193
Nessuna PR unita negli ultimi 30g

Preparare l'ambiente

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di w3c/process

Tutte le issue di w3c/process

Issue simili

Altre issue su Documentation

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.