On 2010.04.22 12:41, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> On 22-04-2010 01:23, Richard Freeman wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > If you look at any other serious organization the purpose of
> committees
> > and bureaucracy is to serve the organization, and the organization
> is
> > represented overall by the board of directors, who are elected by
> the
> > members/shareholders/etc.  This system works well - ultimately the
> > members have absolute authority in elections, but the directors
> oversee
> > things from time to time, and the committees and bureaucracy deal
> with
> > the day-to-day.
> 
> Gentoo (the distribution) is not a Corporation, so that comparison
> isn't
> adequate as well.
> 
>
[snip]
> > Rich
> >
> 
> --
> Regards,
> 
> Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
> Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections
> 

Team,

Gentoo the (distro) has no legal standing at all - thats wrapped up in 
the Foundation. Hence the two headed structure we have today.
That means that Gentoo (the distro) cannot bring a legal action, nor 
can it be the target of one. (There is no legal entity)

We are very close to a standard corporate structure. I suspect if 
there was ever any external (legal) pressure on Gentoo the distro, we 
would adopt a standard corporate structure, with the trustees 
(directors) looking after the business issues and the council looking 
after technical issues as a committee of the Gentoo Foundation Inc.

I won't speculate on the detail of any such change as what we have 
works for us at the moment. The missing strand is someone with a 
position in both groups, serving as a technical director.

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees