| 1 |
On Sun, Apr 1, 2007 at 12:32:06 +0200, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically |
| 4 |
> the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1500 EST), same bat channel |
| 5 |
> (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) ! |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even |
| 8 |
> vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole |
| 9 |
> Gentoo dev list to see. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Hi, |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I won't take this to the council myself, but I think this should be |
| 14 |
discussed at the very least: we need a way to limit the council power, |
| 15 |
since it seems there is nothing to this effect in the metastructure |
| 16 |
glep. I think that when members of the council, who have total control |
| 17 |
on gentoo, say things like "I don't feel we should listen to what the |
| 18 |
dev community thinks", then one should begin to worry. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Concretely, I suggest that a reasonable way is created to appeal council |
| 21 |
decisions. Of course, one should make sure that this won't led to |
| 22 |
systematic appeals that would only make people lose time (something like |
| 23 |
"20% of devs must have agreed to this before any vote takes place", or |
| 24 |
so). |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
If enough people are interested, I'm sure someone will step up to |
| 27 |
present this to the council, and if not, well, it will just have been |
| 28 |
another lost email on this list. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Regards, |
| 31 |
/Alexandre |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
PS: sorry to post this with my g.o address, I haven't resubscribed with |
| 34 |
another address yet. |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Hi, I'm a .signature virus! Please copy me in your ~/.signature. |
Archives