Thank you, @kbc!
When we modeled the contributor guidelines back then, we had intense discussions about the length of each assignment. Although it causes overhead, the working group proposed to keep it rather short for the following reasons:
- The DAO needs to make an active decision (by extending) and attest their support occasionally.
- New KPIs/Goals can be set for each contributor for each extension. 6 months is a good timeframe for the given goals.
- Roles can be filled by anyone on the DAO, so there should be a possibility to propose other members to fill the role.
In practice, the need for extensions spawns very interesting discussions about the role itself and the constitution of the DAO. See the Master of Coin role as an example, where the role was shaped, and the parameters were adjusted (although technically not extension, it came as part of the extension discussions).
I know there are equally good reasons on the other side, but it did work out so far.
Thanks a lot!