[Evergreen-governance-l] Basic rules of governance draft

[Corridan, Jim (ICPR)]

Dan - 

Thanks for moving this forward.  

1.3(a) seems to create a decentralized organization.  2.1(a) appears to conflict with this.  Can you provide a little more detail of your vision and how these two items mesh.  

There is no mention of standing committees as such, only recognized community leadership in 2.1(a).  Should there be something that explains who recognizes these groups and who decides who serves on them?

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: evergreen-governance-l-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:evergreen-governance-l-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Dan Scott
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 4:31 PM
To: Evergreen Governance; Bradley M. Kuhn
Subject: [Evergreen-governance-l] Basic rules of governance draft

Hi:

As promised at the last Governance Committee meeting, I've drafted a Rules of Governance document that attempts to reflect our current reality (we're bootstrapping an Oversight Board for the Evergreen software project so that we can join the Software Conservancy as a member in a fiscal sponsorship agreement) with some additional structure (Chair, Vice-Chair, Secretary) and some minimalist rules for how the rules of governance can be amended. This draft also asserts that the Board is is responsible for the overall policy and direction of the Project, and that the Board does not generally implement practices, but instead relies on the recognized community leadership within the Project to do so. (I've adapted some of this text from the Fedora Project board document, as noted in the license statement at the bottom).

My thought is that it's still too premature to try and get agreement on Board replacement mechanisms, election procedures, individual membership definitions, etc, but by providing a mechanism for amending the Rules of Governance we can define those in a more deliberative, reflective fashion while hopefully enjoying the benefits of membership in the Conservancy. Essentially, we should be able to start with a core set of rules on which we can agree, and then uses the amendment mechanism to evolve the Rules of Governance to encompass further aspects on which we reach agreement over time.

I have posted the documents at
http://evergreen-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=governance:structure#rules_of_governance
and also attached the OpenDocument and PDF versions here for your convenience.

Bradley, obviously if there is anything that is a show-stopper for the Conservancy in the current draft, or if you have suggestions for modifications or enhancements, we're all ears :)

Dan