Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Richard Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [GLEP 39 overhaul] Should the new text be a GLEP, or something else? How do we update it in the future?
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:02:42
Message-Id: 4BCF1D44.6080704@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] [GLEP 39 overhaul] Should the new text be a GLEP, or something else? How do we update it in the future? by Roy Bamford
On 04/20/2010 01:50 PM, Roy Bamford wrote:
> The revised GLEP39 should explicitly state that it can be amended by > some vote or another of the council ... probably unamimous. After all, > we can vote them out in 11 months time or less.
Only if they don't vote to extend their terms. :) How about something that allows for changes, but which also allows for a referendum to confirm the change? Maybe the council can vote to change the GLEP (simple majority). The changes aren't effective until after the next council election. During the next council election a parallel referendum is held to approve the council decision, and then the decision is binding on the next council (which may have some of the same members as the previous one). Also - I think that the GLEP should really define the role and authority of the council, and their terms/etc. I don't think the GLEP should dictate how they operate. If we didn't micromanage the council in the GLEP, maybe there wouldn't be so much need to change it from time to time. If we want to have written policies about how the council operates (slacker marks, vote-by-email, etc) then we should put that in a separate GLEP, which the council can modify like any other. Rich

Replies