Sail,
So far -- so good!

Thanks,
and lets keep this moving forward.

@Herko, phppp, and Marco;
I also would like for you to enter into the discussion. From my point of view, if you do not... this proposal is dead in the water.

It depends on your cooperation.

Thank you,
...darcy

All i can say is "of everything that i have read about the teams, representatives, leaders etc etc.... the suggestion given by sailjapan is probably the best."


Lets rise above our ego to help XOOPS become the best cms, which in my personal opinion is what it deserves to be.

Having collected and compared all proposals I could find up to now (I am trying to post them in a graphic way), I am guided to the following proposal:

XOOPS Project Council
5 Members coming from the Working Groups Representatives
The Development Group has 2 reps, one of them being the Core Development Team Leader.

Core Development Team Leader (= Project Leader) can be member of the Foundation BUT NOT in parallel to his position in the Council. (BTW this is the way I understand the term Project Leader. In any other case sounds like the “King” or the “Big Boss”)

XOOPS Foundation
3 Main Members; Chairman, Legal, Financial
X Members of Honor; All previous Project Leaders, External Members (Private Companies, Institutes, Universities Representatives) who actively and by any means support the XOOPS project. [EDIT (addition)]All members are elected / adopted by the Council.
The main task of the foundation is the lawful operation of the project in terms of procedures, actions and governing processes.
The Foundation should have also the power (as the keys owner) to propose/start elections, advice the Council on general guidelines and take care of the direction the project follows.

Relation between XOOPS Project Council & XOOPS Foundation
The day-by-day Leadership and Deciding is performed by the XOOPS Project Council. The Council co-operates with the Foundation in any case that there is a need for support or the project has organization difficulties (like now for example…).
The Foundation has no influence in the Council’s decisions and vice-versa. They co-operate in good faith, respecting its other, since the existence of one means the existence of the other.
The Foundation has absolutely no influence to the Working Groups, while the Council has.

Working Groups
Self explanatory – many times described

Team Members
The big question. Let’s start: Who elects them and how.
This is the most important since the Team members elect their Leaders who in turn elect the Representatives to the Council.

But let’s first conclude with the organization and then we can start a new Thread…

Quote:

I really think this is true. The key in my estimation is to get a functional organization in place. The issue of who controls the foundation will be reconciled by the fact that a functioning organization will demand that the foundation bow to its will. To fight about this now is somewhat meaningless and simply sparks people's suspicions about others motives, simply because it's "MONEY" we're talking about.

I believe that a project manager should be more associated with a team. A team member is simply defined as someone who has contributed to the team in a specified time period. From that team the community can vote for the "Team Leader / Project Manager". This will give the community representation from 5 to 7 different groups. That group of 5 to 7 gives the yay or nay on initiatives and thus this thing moves forward with the communities interest represented.

In the event we have no consensus or other issue that is not solvable then the "Tie-Breaker" will come into play. Maybe the community votes for this "Tie-breaker / chairperson" from the 5-7 team leaders?

The only way this project will work is if the community gets to participate in the decision making process by having it's elected representatives speak for them. Unfortunately, we do not have a founder or company sponsor that has control of this thing like some other open source projects. I think that is the only way you could have a "One Leader" scenario.

leave the foundation aside for now until there is an organization that can have a unified position to make the appropriate decisions. I personally don't think that the foundation is our biggest worry at this point.

Let's get the low hanging fruit first!

Seth

Well, in order to stop writing thousands of words, let’s try to see what a picture can say.

I have transferred all proposals I managed to find in an Organization Chart look.
You can click on the link above every picture to see them in full size.

PLEASE note that this is what I understood by reading the posts of every poster. Forgive me if I have done any mistake; just tell me to correct it.
Also, please post any link that has a proposal that you may know and has not been mentioned here.


Proposal A (Kc0maz)


Proposal B (predator)


Proposal C (sailjapan)


Proposal D (phppp)


Proposal E (gtop00)


Proposal F (Jmorris)


Proposal G (Mamba)


Proposal H (Foundation) / (Dave_L)



[EDIT] Addition of links to related posts: link to picture (link to post)
[EDIT2] Mamba's proposal added
[EDIT3] Foundation / Dave_L proposal added

You are invited to compare and comment mentioning the proposal letter / poster.

I think you guys need to understand what a project Manager/Leader actually does, because from what I am reading you are all jumping on the dictator bandwagon and that is not what the term for this position. Whether you like it or not, there needs to be some clear managerial structure for this to work and picking a few teams and making someone leader just will not work, sorry.

http://www.maxwideman.com/papers/leader/intro.htm

Maybe once you read this paper it may guide you a little bit more to what the job actually is and not what a lot of people think it is.

Quote:

Very interesting approach! I am going to read it for sure when I have some time.

In our case, the question is not if we need a 'manager' or a 'leader'. We rather need a well structured democratic organization.
Having a good organization, you are not depended 100% from the capability or not of any manager/leader since the 'system' works by itself.

Quote:

Really? If this is the policy that XOOPS adoptes then we will all be back here in a year time dicussing this very same issue again and again.

With all due respect, the system only works when you have someone making sure that is works. I spent enough years working for a company troubleshooting resturants, and making poorly/badly run restraunts reach their targets to understand how a bad management strucutre actually effects the day to day running of a resturant. 9/10 poorly run resturants were due to bad managers and their lack of managerial skills and normally they were the first people I would have to replace. Have a strong leader/manager/whatever-you-wish-to-call-it with clear vision and objectives determines the outcome in more or less all walks of life.

But am sure will will still be debating this next year too.

Hey Catz, there is a misunderstanding; this is not a business case.
We are nobody's clerks and we do not need a boss (good or bad).

We all work here only and only because we like it. We just need to know if our efforts are lost or not.-

Gtop thanks for the organograms. It is much simpler to understand the different proposals now.