[News.eclipse.foundation] Re: [EDP] What is motivating this revision?

["Dave" <dave.bernstein@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Regarding the reasons why reviews are poorly attended, you make it sound as 
if the only members with whom you spoke were board members, as a summary of 
information gleaned from members queried outside board meetings would not 
compromise board confidentiality. Without such a summary, productive 
discourse on this item is impossible.

http://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/council.php shows the Architecture 
Council with 23 members, 5 of which were appointed by the Eclipse 
Foundation. Frankly, I find it difficult to believe that the Strategic 
Developers cannot be convinced to appropriately staff this Council. But if 
that is the case, then I would appoint additional members as necessary to 
create a Council capable of fulfilling its responsibilities.

       Dave


"Bjorn Freeman-Benson" <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
news:ei7vfv$n20$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Dave wrote:
>> +++I did not write any of the Foundation Bylaws.
>
> My error - I did not know the history sufficiently well.
>
>> +++ Those might help. Did you query individual members to determine why 
>> they weren't participating in reviews? If so, what did you learn?
>
> As I mentioned before, we (the EMO) have talked to the Board and the 
> Members about the issue. However, it is not my role to divulge what is 
> said in Board meetings - you'll have to talk to your Board member(s)[1].
>
> [1] http://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/directors.php
>
>>> Dave, I am definitely open to any suggestions and ideas about how to 
>>> make the Architecture Council effective. ...
>> If that's true, then as discussed earlier, the EMO should ...
> > engage with Board members to obtain
>> additional time from Architecture Council members, or both.
>
> Assuming that we have done that and we're still where we are, what other 
> concrete suggestions do you have for improving the effectiveness of the 
> Architecture Council?
>
> - Bjorn