1 |
(items 1 through 2b): |
2 |
> ... |
3 |
+1. Go and read up Robert's Rules of Order folks. The equivalent for |
4 |
your own language usually exists. Erskine May (en_GB) and Code Morin |
5 |
(fr_CA) off the top of my head. |
6 |
|
7 |
> 3) Once discussion on the topic has concluded, the council members |
8 |
> will vote on the actions requested by the developer body. |
9 |
Specifically note for those here that wish to dissent: |
10 |
"Once discussion on the topic has concluded" |
11 |
If the council feels there is insufficent discussion or outstanding |
12 |
issues, it may be postponed. GLEPs have frequently been postponed in |
13 |
the past. Off the top of my head, the first time it happened was GLEP44 |
14 |
(20060209). |
15 |
|
16 |
> That does not mean it is time for council members to concoct an |
17 |
> entirely new plan by the seat of their pants... which leads me to the |
18 |
> next topic. |
19 |
For some topics, alternative plans MAY be appropriate. |
20 |
- For GLEPs I would say that alternatives are completely out of place. |
21 |
The suggestion that an alternative is needed to the GLEP implies that |
22 |
the GLEP author(s) either need to take the further input into |
23 |
consideration, or convince the objecting members of the council that |
24 |
the objectionable portion of the GLEP is indeed sound. |
25 |
- For other issues, the council should certainly have the power to come |
26 |
up with another plan - especially if blending presented plans leads to |
27 |
further agreement between dissenting parties. There are certainly |
28 |
precedents for this: |
29 |
- 20051215: Manifest1 multi-hash |
30 |
- 20070308: Executive powers and CoC actions |
31 |
|
32 |
> 4) Council members will now be expected to ACK the agenda on the |
33 |
> appropriate mailing lists at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. If |
34 |
> you can't, let the council know. You should be able to do this without |
35 |
> relying on your proxy, but your proxy may do this for you as well if |
36 |
> you have an extended away. |
37 |
> 4a) Failure to ACK the agenda will be noted on the meeting minutes. |
38 |
The failure of a proxy to ACK should probably fall on the elected |
39 |
council member for whom the proxy was acting? |
40 |
|
41 |
> 4b) Council members will be expected to formulate their thoughts in |
42 |
> reply to the agenda items and to research the discussion they wish to |
43 |
> have on the mailing list PRIOR to the meeting and not fly by the seat |
44 |
> of their pants. |
45 |
> 4c) "The first I heard of this and I need 4 weeks to research this." |
46 |
> or any variation of the quoted statement is no longer a valid |
47 |
> statement. The point of the meeting is to weigh and debate the items |
48 |
> before us now. Do your research PRIOR to the meeting, not during. |
49 |
Could you codify the time requirement you expect councilmembers to put |
50 |
into their work? In the past, sometimes councils were busy with |
51 |
real-life, so independent research did not get done by any member prior |
52 |
to the meeting. |
53 |
|
54 |
> I look forward to the current council members ack'ing this e-mail |
55 |
> (whether it be in parts or in whole) and I look forward to our Gentoo |
56 |
> developer body ack'ing this e-mail to show support that they want a |
57 |
> "goal oriented action taking" council and not a "delay and talk" |
58 |
> council. This council has only a few short weeks remaining and now is |
59 |
> the time to start reviewing candidates and seeing if they will do for |
60 |
> you in the coming year what you expect a council to do. |
61 |
As developer, but also as a former council member, I'd like to ACK the |
62 |
general principles espoused in this email. A few of the details strike |
63 |
me as reactionary, but the concept is sound. |
64 |
|
65 |
-- |
66 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
67 |
Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy |
68 |
E-Mail : robbat2@g.o |
69 |
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 |