A use case for a DEP

I’ve read in a couple posts already that these changes to membership in the project would be appropriate to manage with a DEP: I agree.

I agree, not because I think the end result should be a DEP (maybe it should be a GR after all), but because of the workflow the DEP procedure proposes.

The key, in my opinion, is the driver (or drivers): somebody without an agenda but trusted by the project who should take care of fostering the discussion, summarizing it regularly while keeping all differences of opinion mentioned, helping the discussion get somewhere, and talking with people in the relevant roles if they, by any chance, would not participate in the discussion directly.

The result would then be a solution which everybody has had a say on, and a text that can be passed by GR with an overwhelming majority. Or, in the worst case, a GR where most of the points are common between options, but that has a couple choices for the most conflicting points, should that be needed.

I would love to see this happen first thing after Lenny: this can be so exciting if done well!