| 1 |
I didn't vote in time to be counted, but here are a couple comments... |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Grant Goodyear wrote: [Sat Apr 16 2005, 09:56:59AM EDT] |
| 4 |
> Here's the results as of this morning. Fifty-three people voted (not |
| 5 |
> including myself, since I'm doing the counting). I should have had us |
| 6 |
> set up a mail alias so that somebody else also received the votes, since |
| 7 |
> with this method people have to trust that my counting is honest. Sorry |
| 8 |
> about that. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> > 1. Gentoo Foundation membership is available to all Gentoo developers |
| 11 |
> > ___ Immediately upon becoming a dev |
| 12 |
> 5 votes |
| 13 |
> > ___ 1 year after becoming a dev |
| 14 |
> 42 votes |
| 15 |
> > ___ 2 years after becoming a dev |
| 16 |
> 2 votes |
| 17 |
> > ___ None of the above |
| 18 |
> 2 votes |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Multiple people commented that this question was too simplistic. Does |
| 21 |
> the X years need to be continuous? What happens with a dev who is on |
| 22 |
> hiatus for some period of time? Should there be an alternative |
| 23 |
> "fast-track w/ Y nominations from existing members" route to becoming |
| 24 |
> a member? Nonetheless, there does seem to be a substantial consensus |
| 25 |
> that 1 year is about right. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Personally, I'd like continuous 1 year required prior to eligibility. |
| 28 |
A hiatus (the semi-official Gentoo term for leave of absence) of more |
| 29 |
than 30 days would revoke membership, requiring 6 months of activity |
| 30 |
following the hiatus to restore membership. This rule would attempt |
| 31 |
to ensure that members are abreast of current goings-on to reduce |
| 32 |
uninformed voting. It's also simple and relatively easy to track. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Some might ask: What about developers that just leave for a while, but |
| 35 |
don't announce they are on hiatus? I'll respond in advance: don't |
| 36 |
worry about it. Hopefully somebody notices and queries them. If |
| 37 |
a developer isn't responding, bring it up on -core in case somebody is |
| 38 |
in contact with the dev in question. If the developer can't be raised |
| 39 |
within 30 days, they will be considered "on hiatus". |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
I don't see the point in fast-track. Keep it simple: 1 year |
| 42 |
continuous activity, then membership is possible. The only point |
| 43 |
I can see in "sponsoring" newer devs to membership is to get more |
| 44 |
supporters for a given vote, which isn't a good reason. I don't think |
| 45 |
it's asking too much for developers to actively contribute for a year |
| 46 |
before they're allowed to vote; after all, they can help swing the |
| 47 |
vote by arguing effectively in a public forum such as -dev without the |
| 48 |
need for voting privileges themselves. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Regards, |
| 51 |
Aron |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
-- |
| 54 |
Aron Griffis |
| 55 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
Archives