1) You want to keep the liason FESCo-selected, rather than group-appointed and FESCo-approved? OK.

Otherwise, ACK.

Replying to [comment:1 notting]:

1) You want to keep the liason FESCo-selected, rather than group-appointed and FESCo-approved? OK.

No. Where does it say that? The liaison role is described because it's the only "special" role that exists, but the selection of that liaison falls under general membership arrangements which is group appointment.

"The Fedora Workstation Work Group has nine voting members, with one member selected by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee as the liaison to FESCo. "

Fixed. Thanks for spotting that.

• AGREED: Workstation Governance Document is approved (+9, 0, -0) (sgallagh, 18:54:51)

jwb and I talked about the abstentions meaning after the meeting. The Workstation Charter is saying that abstentions subtract from how many +1's you need to pass something and that abstentions are implicit after a week.

I noted that it would be nice to add something to the wording to clarify that because (even though it's standard use of abstentions outside of Fedora) within most other Fedora groups abstentions usually do not subtract from the +1's needed to pass something (env & stacks WG is the only other group I know that handles abstentions similarly).

Maybe changing this line:
"Working group members can vote +1 to approve, -1 to disagree, or 0 to abstain; a majority vote is necessary for a measure to pass with abstain votes not being included in the count."

to: "Working group members can vote +1 to approve, -1 to disagree, or 0 to abstain; a majority vote is necessary for a measure to pass with abstain votes decreasing how many +1s are needed to pass."

Or if that's still unclear, using an example of how abstaining affects the needed votes similar to the env and stacks governance charter.