TAG Appointment Process Shortcomings
まだ誰も着手していません。
評価
- 難易度
- 5/5
- 見積もり時間
- 1週間以上
- 初心者へのやさしさ
- 20/100
- issue の種類
- 機能追加
- 明瞭さ
- おおむね明確
- 活発さ
- 停滞
調査の方向性
まず、既存の TAG の任命プロセスと、この issue で提案されている次の 4 つの変更を確認してください。タイミング、TAG への諮問、候補者の選定期間、任期の段階的な設定です。完了条件は、批准と任命のタイミングに関する懸念の解決を含む、合意済みで更新されたプロセスが整備されることです。
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
説明
(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:
- Start the appointment process a short period after the new TAG is seated.
- 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.
- Run the appointment process on a schedule that ensures that the Team are able to find good candidates.
- 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.
- 主要言語
- HTML
- スター
- 263
- フォーク
- 193
- PR マージ指標
- 30日以内にマージされた PR はありません
環境構築
- Dockerfile・Docker Compose ファイルなし
- プルリクエストのテンプレートなし
- コントリビューションガイドを読む
はじめの一歩
- issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
- 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
- リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
- issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。
w3c/process のほかの issue
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 65/100
-
Agenda+
難易度 5/5 1週間以上 初心者へのやさしさ 35/100
-
Agenda+
難易度 5/5 1週間以上 初心者へのやさしさ 35/100
-
Type: Enhancement
難易度 5/5 1週間以上 初心者へのやさしさ 35/100
-
Type: Enhancement
難易度 5/5 1週間以上 初心者へのやさしさ 35/100
似ている issue
-
documentation glm5 llm-model
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 78/100
vllm-project/vllm-ascend#19062 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
難易度 1/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 78/100
tursodatabase/turso#10052 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
Mac mini M6 (16 GB): Q2_0 streaming works - measured 11.7->27.2 tok/s + arena fix for sub-32 GB Macsオープン
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 68/100
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
enhancement needs triage
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 70/100
elastic/docs-builder#4495 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 74/100
cellrishi-code/claude-skills-atlas#165 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信