Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-project
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-project: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: "gentoo-project@g.o >> gentoo-project" <gentoo-project@g.o>
From: Richard Freeman <rich0@g.o>
Subject: Re: [GLEP 39 overhaul] Do we want to make changes to the role of the council?
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 07:58:07 -0400
On 04/17/2010 07:50 PM, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> Do we want to make changes to the role of the council?
>

Note - I mention Trustees a few times - this policy would of course not 
govern the trustees.  I mention them only to draw contrasts and better 
define the role of the council, which this does define.

I'm not sure this is actually a change, but I think that many would 
consider this a change, so perhaps it should be made explicit:

There is one Gentoo.  The Council heads it up.  There is one Gentoo 
Foundation.  The trustees head it up.  Full stop.

All other positions of leadership/etc exist to facilitate day to day 
work.  All are subordinate to one of these two bodies.  The council may 
be voting enact or revoke policy on behalf of any project/etc, and may 
make administrative decisions regarding project leads/etc.

Of course, the council is encouraged to not do so unless absolutely 
necessary.

The council ultimately represents all Gentoo devs, and so in the event 
of any kind of conflict they ultimately hold the final vote, except in 
matters concerning the foundation.  There the trustees hold a similar role.

Also - neither the trustees nor the council as a whole are required to 
recuse themselves from any decision due to a perceived conflict of 
interest, except where contrary to law.  Individual members of these 
bodies can of course do so at their own discretion.  If, for example, 
the council wants to settle a devrel matter directly, it can be judge, 
jury, court of appeals, and executioner.  Again, this should obviously 
not be the norm.

I know that lots of people seem to think that somehow it isn't good for 
the council to have too much power, but I think that ultimately somebody 
needs to be in charge.  I'd rather it be the council (elected by all) 
than some project head or whatever.  And I definitely don't like all the 
time wasted when everybody second guesses whether anybody is actually 
allowed to do something.  The norm of course should be for the council 
to be the court of appeals and not a day-to-day admin body.

Rich






Replies:
Re: [GLEP 39 overhaul] Do we want to make changes to the role of the council?
-- Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
Re: [GLEP 39 overhaul] Do we want to make changes to the role of the council?
-- Roy Bamford
References:
[GLEP 39 overhaul] Do we want to make changes to the role of the council?
-- Denis Dupeyron
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-project: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
[GLEP 39 overhaul] Do we want to make changes to the role of the council?
Next by thread:
Re: [GLEP 39 overhaul] Do we want to make changes to the role of the council?
Previous by date:
Re: [GLEP 39 overhaul] Voting by email, proxies and slacker rule.
Next by date:
Re: [GLEP 39 overhaul] Voting by email, proxies and slacker rule.


Updated Jun 18, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-project mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.