Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:28:45
Message-Id: 1276799306.2335.0@NeddySeagoon
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel by Sebastian Pipping
On 2010.06.17 01:00, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Hello!
> > Problem: Both betelgeuse and jmbsvicetto are DevRel members > nominated for the upcoming council election. > As I am also nominated proposing such rule could be > understood aiming at decreasing their chances on the > council and increasing mine as a result. However, as > I > propose to start over with a developer voted conflict > resolution team this is not the case. The only > implication is that if they make it to the council > they cannot be elected for the conflict resolution > team. > > > DevRel is one of the most important things in Gentoo - we dependend > on > that working well. If you care about this please make yourself > heard. > > Thanks, > > > > Sebastian > > > >
Sebastian, You are suggesting that devrel/council members don't know of the conflict of interests beforehand and/or that they fail to disqualify themselves from an active part in either the devrel or council part of the proceedings. I admit that the possibility exists under present rules. Enforced division of responsibility can be a good thing in places but I'm not convinced that this is one of those places. That said, I would not want devrel to become a subset of council, nor council to become a subset of devrel. Its just for that reason that the Foundation bylaws forbid any individual serving as a trustee and on council at the same time. Maybe I am coming round to supporting your view after all. -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees