| 1 |
On 14:07 Sat 29 Jan , Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 2 |
> Since QA is getting lots of powers these days, I strongly object to |
| 3 |
> this, see also my comment on becoming a QA member. I suggest the |
| 4 |
> following: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> The QA lead is yearly elected by the whole dev-community (active |
| 7 |
> developers), same procedure as being used for a council voting. The |
| 8 |
> nomination is also done by developers, but they can only chose from |
| 9 |
> the current QA-members. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I already think there's too much time wasted on bureaucratic stuff that |
| 12 |
distracts us from actually getting work done. We're here to create an |
| 13 |
awesome source-based distribution, not pretend we're United Nations and |
| 14 |
the U.S. government all rolled into one. =) |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
In my opinion, reaching the minimum number of elections that allows |
| 17 |
Gentoo to remain functional should be the goal. There's nothing wrong |
| 18 |
with concentrating power in a smaller number of people using a |
| 19 |
meritocratic process -- OSS communities seem to operate much better as a |
| 20 |
meritocracy than a democracy, as that provides an incentive to actually |
| 21 |
get stuff done instead of talk about the best process for it all day. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Thanks, |
| 25 |
Donnie |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Donnie Berkholz |
| 28 |
Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 29 |
Blog: http://dberkholz.com |
Archives