Stuart Herbert wrote:
> As a non-trustee, I have absolutely no visibility w.r.t. which trustees
> are actively carrying out their duties, and which ones aren't. I'd like
> to know more on that, because I wouldn't want to vote for any current
> trustees who simply aren't pulling their weight there.
> How can you provide that information to the wider community?
That's a problem that I am open to suggestions for.. I guess a count of
mail participation is one good way to tell, but I could be spitting a
bunch of useless crap to the rest of the trustees via email to get my
"rank" up, so it's not necessarily a fair view. But yet, getting this
information out to the community is important. I've had many
discussions with many people (both devs and trustees) about this.. One
thing I do not want to see the Foundation become is political, but yet
there will inevitably be a certain amount of politics involved.
I guess ultimately people need to realize that it's not a fun job, and
maybe that will deminish some of the push for politics. The future
trustees will have to finalize how we move forward with protecting our
code, and from what we are hearing the lawyers say that will most likely
require some kind of assignment or license from the developers (with
other options currently being researched). No matter which route is
taken, it will be impossible to please everybody.
> I guess what you need is a group of trustees who are willing to put the
> effort in to get such a scheme setup and running. Once you reach
> critical mass, you can then employ an administrator
Agreed. Like I mentioned before, maybe we should consider the "voting
vs non-voting, paid vs. non-paid memberships" an option for the future.
Right now I feel we need to keep it simple.
> Or you still have your voting deadline, and then expel everyone who
> doesn't vote. Think of it as an annual clearout of inactive accounts ;-)
> (Personally, I'm in favour of an opt-in approach to voting, rather than
> mandatory voting. But the idea's worth floating)
I don't think that would be too fair to people who miss a vote for valid
reasons, or who may wish to protest a vote. That is, in a way, forcing
a mandatory vote by expelling people who do not vote.
Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team and Devrel Team
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
email@example.com mailing list