1 |
On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 15:25 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
2 |
> One thing that has consistently been brought up is that there is |
3 |
> no representation for non-developers in the Foundation. The Gentoo |
4 |
> Foundation is supposed to be about the Gentoo community, not just a |
5 |
> selective and restricted subset of said community. |
6 |
|
7 |
We likely then need to see about registration of non developers. I think |
8 |
knowing who is and isn't a member has been part of the issue. Even worse |
9 |
when it comes to the community. But I agree their should be a voice |
10 |
there and membership availability. |
11 |
|
12 |
> I can see having some kind of "timeout" for membership, but it should |
13 |
> *not* be based on someone's role within the Gentoo developer community. |
14 |
> Perhaps participation in the Foundation should count. |
15 |
|
16 |
Yes or based on voting. Last time you vote in a foundation related |
17 |
election, or matter if brought to the membership base for a vote. Then |
18 |
maybe inactive suspension ~1yr, and then automatic removal ~2yrs. |
19 |
|
20 |
Removed members can rejoin via membership form previously mention, or |
21 |
some form of re-activation process, etc. Developers, staff members, and |
22 |
the rest would have automatic sign up for foundation. Or be part of |
23 |
recruitment process, quizzes, join foundation, ... |
24 |
|
25 |
Although that gets murky wrt to new foundation members. Since there |
26 |
should still likely be a 1yr requirement before qualification to vote. |
27 |
So how to determine activity or inactivity there would need to be |
28 |
addressed. |
29 |
|
30 |
> Remember, the Gentoo Foundation is what drives Gentoo (the distribution) |
31 |
> or at least that's how it is supposed to be. Let's not think of things |
32 |
> backwards. The current ideas seem to stem from the idea that the |
33 |
> distribution controls the Foundation, when it should be the exact |
34 |
> opposite. The Foundation *should* be a proponent of the community. It |
35 |
> *should* take in what the community wants and try to steer the |
36 |
> development pool in that direction. It should be a catalyst for |
37 |
> positive change within Gentoo, not simply a reactionary body that does |
38 |
> nothing more than echo the wishes of the developer community. |
39 |
|
40 |
Given the condition. First we must grow legs, then we can learn to |
41 |
stand, then walk, then run. Point being we have many issues to resolve. |
42 |
Not discounting any of the above, I agree with pretty much all of it. |
43 |
|
44 |
Right the foundation can barely deal with the smallest of tasks. I am |
45 |
not talking about a man power issue necessarily. But there are just so |
46 |
many issues to address. We really are in no position to play liaison or |
47 |
to steer things at this time, IMHO. |
48 |
|
49 |
We would like to work with and help out the council. And ideally long |
50 |
term take on the roles mentioned. However that might be something that |
51 |
we lay the foundation for, and subsequent boards, etc. Actually get to |
52 |
explore and see as a reality. |
53 |
|
54 |
> Remember guys, you have the ability to rebuild the |
55 |
> Foundation how you see fit. Don't pass up this opportunity because of |
56 |
> history or the status quo. Do what you think is best and everybody else |
57 |
> be damned. ;] |
58 |
|
59 |
And that's why we are trying to keep our focus narrow and on a single |
60 |
target at a time for now. We are some what multi-tasking. So it's not |
61 |
like we are all working on one thing. But we do have priorities. Of |
62 |
which after reinstatement. I am pretty sure is the by laws, and |
63 |
foundational matters like this. We just want to have a high completion, |
64 |
and success rate :) |
65 |
|
66 |
However as Roy stated, wrt to by laws and likely how the foundation |
67 |
operates in general. Might be a multi-step process as we fine tune the |
68 |
by laws, procedures, operations, etc. |
69 |
|
70 |
We are not perfect, there is much to be discussed and decided upon. Not |
71 |
to mention it's a balancing act with progress, and debate. So we very |
72 |
well might go back on things, as part of the fine tuning and tweaking |
73 |
process. |
74 |
|
75 |
-- |
76 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
77 |
amd64/Java/Trustees |
78 |
Gentoo Foundation |