On Thursday 02 July 2009 10:54:05 Tobias Scherbaum wrote:
> Ned Ludd wrote:
> > The devs have a voice one time of the year: when it comes time to vote.
> > But what about the rest of the year? What happens when the person you
> > voted for sucks? You are mostly powerless to do anything other than be
> > really vocal in what seems like a never ending battle. That needs to
> > change. I'm not quite sure how. But I'd like to see the dev body have a
> > year-round voice in the council. Either via quick votes year-round
> > on topics or simply by having discussion in the channel. Devs should have
> > a right to voice their concerns to the council and engage in interactive
> > conversations without being labeled troll.
>
> I'm not sure about that, but we can easily give it a try.
>
> What I'd like to see for sure is a formal rule on who can decide to
> modify or change parts of glep 39.

we already have a formal method:
 - change is proposed ahead of time like any other business for council to 
review (which means the community sees it)
 - council votes and assuming it passed
 - the dev/council lists are notified of changes (see previous summaries for 
example)
 - if there is still no problems, then the project page/GLEP is amended 
officially

if the dev community has a problem, then it should have come up like any other 
issue along the way.  if the only way to resolve the greater dev concerns is 
with a vote, then that is how it goes.  needing a full community vote all the 
time is a huge time waste for absolutely no gain.
-mike