1 |
William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> Seems the rules could just be changed to say, active dev, on for 1yr, |
4 |
> etc. You can vote, just like for council. Since it seems all Foundation |
5 |
> membership gives one, is the ability to vote on Foundation matters. |
6 |
> Which is basically just elections. |
7 |
> |
8 |
|
9 |
As seen in the other thread on spending authority, there is the |
10 |
possibility of conflict between the council and the trustees, and we |
11 |
obviously want to avoid that when possible or chaos would result. |
12 |
|
13 |
For this reason, I think that it is important that the constituencies of |
14 |
the foundation and the council should be the same - or as close to the |
15 |
same as possible. If these boards are both elected by the same people |
16 |
they're not going to end up being totally opposed on numerous issues. |
17 |
|
18 |
In an ideal world there would be a single governing body, which avoids |
19 |
these kinds of issues altogether. That is how most non-profits operate |
20 |
- there is a single board of directors that runs the whole show, |
21 |
typically though hired executives. |
22 |
|
23 |
The downside to a single governing body is that for legal reasons it has |
24 |
to operate in accordance with bylaws/laws/etc, and there has been |
25 |
reluctance to adopting this level of formality for all Gentoo matters. |
26 |
|
27 |
What is ultimately important is that these two bodies work in harmony - |
28 |
I think that is what is desired in any case. If there is substantial |
29 |
conflict it may possibly lead to ruin for the distro - at least under |
30 |
the "Gentoo" name... |
31 |
-- |
32 |
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |