Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:49:36
Message-Id: CAGfcS_=vSGbuCrg+nJxpHKhuFqqum-YGb=-gX-uiaW9VoMu-pA@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years by William Hubbs
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:42 AM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
>  But, you are saying that the council has to approve changes for glep >  39 before they can come to a vote. This would mean that say a majority >  of developers doesn't like something in glep 39, but the council >  doesn't approve the change. That change will never come to a vote. In >  other words, the council has control of the rules that govern it. Is >  that what you are intending? >
Arguably the current rules are pretty ambiguous for the council. The rules are fairly explicit for the Foundation, where there are rules about having membership-convened meetings/etc. However, maybe we should avoid having a huge debate over this issue. We can't even get a huge percentage of the developer base to vote in an election in the first place. I'm not too concerned about how we'll handle the first organized recall. My recommendation would be to let the council take the leadership on this and organize a vote if necessary. If we start seeing threads with 85 unique developer participants chanting "down with the council" then we can worry about how we bypass them. Rich

Replies