Hey all,

The following was what I wrote in my notes today as a definition of the TWG mandate:

Technical Working Group Mandate:
- The role of the TWG is as the 'conflict resolution body for technical conflict' (similar to how the Community working group is the conflict resolution body for 'people' conflict).

- The TWG also has a responsibility as the community 'curator' of technical policy, accountable for ensuring that community technical policies are documented, published, and maintained current.

- The community perspective seems to be that we are responsible for 'authoring' policy; or driving the conversation and facilitating the process of gaining community consensus on all policy proposals (more specifically, all of the coding standards issues which were moved to our queue). 

- I don't feel that the working group is well positioned to actually take on this perceived role, as attempting to keep abreast of every potential technical policy proposal being made or debated within the community would quickly bury us ... and my view is that we are not looking to 'replace' the existing community consensus-driven approach, only augment it in order to guide the community when that existing process breaks down.



Meeting Minutes

As a rough 'meeting minutes' for the call, I also jotted down the following:

Perceived operational issues:
- Ability to comment within the issue queues, and fear of 'own' comments being mistaken as an authoritative comment on behalf of the 'TWG'.
- Working group members not subscribed to notifications of new issues being opened or commented on within the TWG queue
- Lack of transparency regarding the working group within the larger community (administrative foundation, policies and procedures regarding how we operate and interact with the community)
- Lacking a working group 'chair', who assumes responsibility for the administrative and facilitative operation of the working group (i.e. scheduling meetings, setting agendas, establishing milestones and/or deadlines, etc)
- Availability, interest, and initiative of existing working group membership in the absence of an official chair driving active working group progress

Actions and Next Steps:
- Need to appoint a chairperson.  Howard to consider the role, and touch base with Dries within a few days
- Mark stepping down from the working group.  Everyone to consider potential replacement suggestions (provide to Dries).
- Need to ensure we have a regularly recurring meeting slot scheduled in everyone's calendar.  Suggested frequency is monthly.  Accountability for the action to be assigned to the new working group chair.
- Suggested that next meeting include a discussion to ensure working group member alignment on the group's perceived mandate.
- Jeremy to forward his interpretation/description of the TWG mandate to everyone on the call.


Thanks again for the call ... good to hear from everyone again.  :)

- Jeremy