| 1 |
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:05:10 -0700 |
| 2 |
"Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 04:09:53PM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote: |
| 5 |
> > * Can we find a better name than "the Proctors", please? |
| 6 |
> > Yes, that's a completely petty point, but it was the first |
| 7 |
> > one that came to mind. |
| 8 |
> Suggestions welcome. We were stuck for other suitable names, and it |
| 9 |
> was my own suggestion for proctors, based on the dictionary |
| 10 |
> definition: "an official charged with various duties, esp. with the |
| 11 |
> maintenance of good order." [1] |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
"Communication supervisors" seems like a good fit to me. At least |
| 14 |
better than some random term from a dictionary nobody has ever |
| 15 |
heard before. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> > > Any input will have to be received by Thursday, 15 March, 1200GMT |
| 18 |
> > > in order to be useful; the Council will be voting on it later |
| 19 |
> > > that day at 2100UTC. |
| 20 |
> > * I understand the desire to act quickly, so that it appears that |
| 21 |
> > Gentoo is doing something about this problem. However, I agree |
| 22 |
> > with those who think that a few days isn't really enough time for |
| 23 |
> > an adequate discussion. For this sort of policy to be effective, |
| 24 |
> > devs need to agree with it. The Council can still make temporary |
| 25 |
> > rules on Thursday while allowing the rest of the process to occur |
| 26 |
> > more leisurely. |
| 27 |
> As the council, you have charged us with ensuring a technical |
| 28 |
> direction for Gentoo. We are working on it, we really are. In the |
| 29 |
> meantime, we saying that the buck stops here, because right now, |
| 30 |
> Gentoo is being seriously damaged as a distribution. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> If these rules don't help matters in the short term, please really do |
| 33 |
> bring another proposal (some hybrid of the Ubuntu CoC even), either |
| 34 |
> to us, or the council that succeeds us. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how your reply adresses |
| 37 |
Grants concern. Why does this have to be rushed so quickly? Just to |
| 38 |
"fight" the bad PR caused by the distrowatch article? |
| 39 |
I think it's clear by now that the presented draft has some major flaws |
| 40 |
(namely the definition of "we" and the scope), so at least another |
| 41 |
review round would be in order, and the given timeframe ends in just 36 |
| 42 |
hours. If you don't see the concern here then I'm not sure why this has |
| 43 |
been open for comments in the first place. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Marius |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be |
| 51 |
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. |
Archives