Gentoo Archives: gentoo-nfp

From: Richard Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-nfp@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-nfp] nominations
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 02:31:56
Message-Id: 498BA033.6080806@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-nfp] nominations by Roy Bamford
Roy Bamford wrote:
> The rule prevents the Foundation being a subset of the council and > preseves the split that was intended when the Foundation was > established. Maybe the split wasn't a good idea in the first place? > Its certainly an odd management structure that Gentoo has. > > It also prevents a huge hole being left in the gentoo management > structure by the loss of a single individual. >
I understand the arguments that have been put forth for the separation, but I don't agree. Honestly, the one organization being largely a subset of the other sounds perfectly fine to me - almost ideal. There should really be "One Gentoo" - the more unity between the organizations the better. Of course, the skills needed to be a trustee and a council member are not identical, so it isn't a bad idea to allow different people to participate on each. However, forced independence isn't a good idea in my opinion. At the same time, I appreciate that doing a good job on either organization takes time, so care should be taken before just stepping up to the plate for both. On the other hand, representation matters more on a board than effort. In fact, I'd encourage both boards to delegate tasks to individuals willing to perform them and focus more on oversight. This largely happens with the council (devrel, recruiters, and other project/arch leads), but the trustees seem to be a bit more limited in manpower.