Gentoo Archives: gentoo-council

From: Paul Varner <fuzzyray@g.o>
To: gentoo-council@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Re: [gentoo-dev] Special meeting [WAS: Council meeting summary for 8 May 2008]
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 20:10:42
Message-Id: 1210968635.8656.22.camel@txslpc1d36.wkst.vzwnet.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-council] Re: [gentoo-dev] Special meeting [WAS: Council meeting summary for 8 May 2008] by Ferris McCormick
1 On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 15:09 +0000, Ferris McCormick wrote:
2 > On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 09:59 -0500, Paul Varner wrote:
3 > > Clarify the GLEP so that it refers to reqularly scheduled meetings only.
4 > > I see no reason to kick the council out and rehold elections over a
5 > > miscommunicated special meeting.
6 > >
7 > > Regards,
8 > > Paul
9 >
10 > It's at least as hard to modify the GLEP as it is to follow it. And I
11 > don't think we want to be in the business of changing policies then
12 > applying the new policies retroactively. If we do that, what's the
13 > point of having policies in the first place? And, as ciaranm (one of
14 > the GLEP's authors) pointed out, the GLEP requires at least one open
15 > meeting per month, not regularly scheduled meetings. This month,
16 > Council scheduled two meetings, and the GLEP applies to all Council
17 > meetings.
18
19 (Now that I've read through all of the responses on -project.)
20
21 Back when we voted on the new metastructure I read the GLEP as meaning
22 the regularly scheduled meeting. However, since ciaranm wrote the
23 proposal and has stated that he clearly meant it to be any meeting at
24 all, then I guess it means it is time for an election. However, I still
25 would like the intent of the GLEP clarified. If I can misread the
26 intent of the GLEP, then so can others as well.
27
28 As far as miscommunication for holding the meeting, I am giving the
29 council the benefit of the doubt based upon Donnie's intial email.
30
31 Regards,
32 Paul
33 --
34 gentoo-council@l.g.o mailing list