| 1 |
On 1/31/08, William L. Thomson Jr. <wltjr@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 10:24 -0800, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 4 |
> > OK, I'm starting a new thread here to try to discuss some things the |
| 5 |
> > trustees can do to improve both visibility and also attempt to |
| 6 |
> > ensure/promote progress within the Foundation. Please chime in with |
| 7 |
> > your own ideas. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > - Regular meetings - The trustees should have a regular monthly meeting |
| 10 |
> > to discuss progress, preferably the first week of the month (for GMN). |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > - Regular GMN section - I think that both the Council and the trustees |
| 13 |
> > should have a section each for summaries of their latest meetings. This |
| 14 |
> > should relay information about what is happening to the developer pool |
| 15 |
> > and the community, in general. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > - Named positions - I also think that specifically putting certain |
| 18 |
> > people into certain positions would possibly improve getting things |
| 19 |
> > done. For each position, there should be an alternate, so that we don't |
| 20 |
> > end up relying on a single person. This also breaks up the |
| 21 |
> > responsibilities a bit so that the trustees and the community know what |
| 22 |
> > responsibilities that each person should be working. Positions that I |
| 23 |
> > see that could/should be filled: President, Secretary, Treasurer |
| 24 |
> > |
| 25 |
> > Those are my initial ideas. Comments? |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> +1 to all |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Also I think that possibly the trustees should do more personnel and |
| 30 |
> drama management. Which presently falls under the council, but doesn't |
| 31 |
> seem technical in nature. But that could potentially be controversial, |
| 32 |
> and not likely to be one of the first actions. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
I would prefer you inquire about this at a council meeting. Gentoo |
| 35 |
the distribution has lots of siloing and leadership problems that need |
| 36 |
work and I think with stronger leadership you will note a decrease in |
| 37 |
drama. I am not sure how many developers are interested in being a |
| 38 |
'project lead'; currently people are more 'technical leads'. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-Alec |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> One of the first actions I would like to see. Which I will mention when |
| 44 |
> I write a formal agenda for my plans in office if elected. Is to |
| 45 |
> transfer financial and legal matters to the SPI, pending a vote on the |
| 46 |
> matter. Verses doing it in house. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> If that happened, we would still need named positions. As in one person, |
| 49 |
> with a backup to be the liaison between Gentoo and the SPI. Along with |
| 50 |
> other defined/named roles for a re-focused board of trustees. With the |
| 51 |
> main weight of financial and legal obligations and responsibilities |
| 52 |
> removed. |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> Focusing then on fund raising, relations, bolstering the community, etc. |
| 55 |
> All of the things that don't fall under the realm of the council. Which |
| 56 |
> as stated above, some things might need transfer of responsibility from |
| 57 |
> council to foundation. For non technical things, and things the council |
| 58 |
> would rather not deal with nor should have to. |
| 59 |
> |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> -- |
| 62 |
> William L. Thomson Jr. |
| 63 |
> Gentoo/amd64/Java |
| 64 |
> |
| 65 |
> |
| 66 |
-- |
| 67 |
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives