Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-council
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: Ned Ludd <solar@g.o>
From: Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>
Subject: Re: Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:32:15 -0700
On 07:46 Mon 27 Jul     , Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 19:06 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > On 23:54 Fri 24 Jul     , Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> > > The log and summary of Monday's council meeting (July 20th 2009) are
> > > now available on the council project page at:
> > > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/
> > 
> > 3. GLEP 39
> > 
> >   3.1. Can the council decide on the process of voting amendments to GLEP 39
> >   without an all-developers vote?
> >   > No: betelgeuse, dertobi123, solar, ulm.
> >   > Yes: calchan, leio.
> > 
> > 
> > I'd like some clarification here. GLEP 39 has already been amended by 
> > the council [1]. Are you declaring those modifications illegal and thus 
> > reverted? If so, this is retroactive because it changes the past and 
> > removes powers that were assumed by previous councils. Are you voting to 
> > remove powers the council previously had? If so, isn't that in itself an 
> > amendment of GLEP 39?
> > 
> > 1. http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.html?r1=1.2&r2=1.3
> 
> My personal take on it. Is rather that we mostly all agree the council
> does not have the power to modify GLEP-39 as is. If the previous
> councils altered GLEP-39 and there are no challenges to it, then I don't
> think the existing one is going to revert those changes (more so if we
> admit that the existing one should leave it alone) 

Here's my take on things. I think that changes to GLEP 39 that "fix" it 
are fine (in other words, amendments). Most developers aren't lawyers 
looking for every little loophole, they just vote on the basic model 
they want; so the council should respect that by making that basic model 
as good as it can be.

But switching to a different governance model should get a global vote 
by all developers -- not because it's required to, but out of a basic 
respect for our developers and a desire to run Gentoo in a way that 
people want it run.

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com


References:
Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009
-- Denis Dupeyron
Re: Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009
-- Donnie Berkholz
Re: Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009
-- Ned Ludd
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-council: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009
Next by thread:
Council Summary for Meeting on Monday 17 August, 2009
Previous by date:
Re: Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009
Next by date:
Council Summary for Meeting on Monday 17 August, 2009


Updated Nov 13, 2011

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-council mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.