On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Roy Bamford <email@example.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On 2008.06.12 15:34, Richard Freeman wrote:
>> Currently they are essentially the same. However, the reason I bring
>> this up is that there is some debate over whether the foundation
>> membership should be substantially expanded beyond just gentoo devs
>> (possibly including end-users, or those willing to pay a membership
>> of some sort). These kinds of situations could lead to the sorts of
>> conflicts I'd like to avoid, as now you have two boards with
>> agendas in charge of aspects of the same project.
As a trustee I've taken the position that current gentoo devs should
be the only ones that make up members of the foundation.
However I am still listening to both side of the coin so I could be
There's a reason why it's called a DRAFT. We'll hopefully work
something out that while it might not be perfect in all eyes,
hopefully it is something reasonable to most if not all AND in the
best interest of the project.
>> firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
> The constituencies are not the same but today, under the draft bylaws,
> they are diverging. That is something the trustees need to fix in the
> first formal adoption of bylaws.
> To vote in a council election, developers must have been developers for
> a year (from memory). Thus the council represents the views of that
> group of developers. Also, only developers may serve as councilors.
> To qualify to vote in a trustee election, the electorate is formed from
> foundation member and those eligible to become a foundation member.
> At present, you become a foundation member by voting in a trustee
> election. To be an eligible non-member, you need to have been a
> developer for a year. Read that a few times, its a little circular.
> This means that the foundation represents its members who are all the
> dev's who have ever voted in an election. Only foundation members may
> serve as trustees.
> Under present draft bylaws foundation membership never lapses so such
> famous past developers as drobbins (our first president) have votes and
> could become trustees. Thus under present draft bylaws the foundation
> becomes more representative of members who are ex devs, simply because
> one day, ex devs members will outnumber active dev members.
This is one of those things that is problematic. It's like letting
your ex girlfriend keep the key to your apartment.
> Note that elegible active devs who have never voted in a trustee
> election are not foundation members.
email@example.com mailing list