-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add Reappointment
subdecision for organ mutations
#346
Comments
Self-reference is a recursive curse that I do not want to touch. As such, |
I originally wanted to restrict the usage of this decision to the Advisory Board, however, that makes things a lot more complicated. As such, it will be the responsibility of the board to NOT misuse this new functionality. None of the other bodies of GEWIS require reappointments. |
Through the UI, reappointments can only be directly made on |
Forgot to add that any function that is not reappointed will be automatically discharged. |
During any install or just after the year? |
:( I have not worked with the yearly limit, as imho it is not feasible to get working without massively rewriting how organ mutations work. So in its current form, if the secretary wants reappoint a member in a body, they either only reappoint their membership (any function will be discharged) or they reappoint the membership and a subset of the functions (the setdiff is discharged). If someone else is installed/discharged no reappointments have to be made, as the existing memberships should still be as expected. This works for the Advisory Board (and any other body) as the GMM is still required to reappoint/discharge the members on the first GMM of the new association year (already omitting the 'zittingstermijn voor leden van de RvA is één jaar'). |
What would you like?
This is a direct consequence of ABC-2309-556. Due to the internal regulations, (some) members of the Advisory Board are reappointed each year. However, this is not supported in GEWISDB.
To facilicate this behaviour, we need to add a
Reappointment
subdecision that can handle this.Why is this needed?
No response
Other information
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: