| 1 |
On 08:58 Fri 05 Aug , Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 04-08-2011 13:08:06 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On 18:15 Tue 02 Aug , Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > I think yes, if the council regarding GLEP39 thinks A, but the dev |
| 5 |
> > > population B, then it is unlikely the council will vote for B. |
| 6 |
> > > However, the dev population should vote for other council members |
| 7 |
> > > that do support B for the next term in that case. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > I think the whole idea is rather absurd that the council could |
| 10 |
> > disagree with a change to GLEP 39 and thus prevent it from going to |
| 11 |
> > a developer-wide vote, even though they don't think they have the |
| 12 |
> > authority to change the GLEP. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Let me try to put it different: |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> The assumption that the council has to vote for GLEP39, perhaps is |
| 17 |
> wrong. Would it make more sense when the council would suggest the |
| 18 |
> changes for GLEP39 and have the dev community vote on acceptance? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Beforehand, the council then -- internally -- has to vote if they |
| 21 |
> agree on the changes being put forward to the dev community. I think |
| 22 |
> there should be a majority vote among the council members before such |
| 23 |
> proposal is sent out for a dev vote. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I still don't like it. I think that anyone should be able to submit |
| 26 |
things to a developer-wide vote if desired, regardless of whether a |
| 27 |
council majority supports it. I suppose maybe I would be OK with having |
| 28 |
at least one council "sponsor" for the vote, but I hate the idea of the |
| 29 |
council having a pre-vote veto on any idea they don't like that changes |
| 30 |
how they operate. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Let's say I propose an idea that 80% of the council likes but 80% of |
| 33 |
developers want. This doesn't seem unreasonable since I was very highly |
| 34 |
ranked in voting with a platform that involves totally changing our |
| 35 |
leadership structure, and yet the council insists it cannot change GLEP |
| 36 |
39. I would be pretty pissed if most of Gentoo wanted something but the |
| 37 |
"cabal" at the top didn't even let them make the choice. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
I would be OK with the council having a nonbinding vote on the matter |
| 40 |
prior to an all-dev vote just so everybody knows where they stand, but I |
| 41 |
think the matter should go to a full vote regardless of the results. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Thanks, |
| 45 |
Donnie |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Donnie Berkholz |
| 48 |
Council Member / Sr. Developer |
| 49 |
Gentoo Linux |
| 50 |
Blog: http://dberkholz.com |
Archives