1 |
On Tuesday 02 October 2007, Steve Long wrote: |
2 |
> Agreed, as it leaves Gentoo without a Council for a month, and you could |
3 |
> end up with no consistency at all viz date of elections. Stating that the |
4 |
> officials must be selected before the nomination process can be started, |
5 |
> and that the same deadline applies (one month of nominations, one of |
6 |
> voting) seems like good planning. Might as well get the whole process |
7 |
> sorted with one vote and move on. |
8 |
|
9 |
this was all cleared up the last meeting |
10 |
|
11 |
> I also concur with whoever said Council meeting notifications should be |
12 |
> discussed on project (maybe a reply-to project for the notification if it |
13 |
> needs to go to dev to ensure everyone sees it) since the discussion is |
14 |
> rarely about technical stuff, despite that being most of the work which the |
15 |
> Council does. Even for technical matters, the discussions i have seen at |
16 |
> least on dev about Council decisions, have always been contentious and |
17 |
> veered off into non-technical aspects (which is probably why they're on the |
18 |
> Council agenda in the first place.) |
19 |
|
20 |
no. the point of the notice was that so people who were trying to get |
21 |
technical standards passed did not forget about the timeline of doing so. |
22 |
i'll see about duplicating the notice to -project though. |
23 |
-mike |