Gentoo Archives: gentoo-nfp

From: Koon <koon@g.o>
To: gentoo-nfp@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-nfp] I met with my lawyer
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 14:29:26
In Reply to: [gentoo-nfp] I met with my lawyer by Daniel Robbins
Daniel Robbins wrote:

> If you have any suggestions for improvement or for coordinator/project lead > structure, try to see if you can suggest it so that it can work in the > context of what I've just outlined above.
Well, I've already written a few letters detailing my suggestions, so while I'm at it, I will comment on how my suggestions can work in this context. - I think NFP evolution must happen quickly, so a non-elected transition board is probably the best way, and I'm very happy to see it becoming more real every day - Election of the board on the developer corpus is a good idea, maybe one year for the transition board before elections is too much but we have other things to do than to run elections all the time - I fear that the number of board members (if all current "managers" go in) will be too much people to have good conflict resolution. 5 people would be the best, 7 is I think the upper limit... But you can think otherwise and/or it can be the mission of the transition board to set up a more effective structure - Board members will be in effect the project managers. I think a two-level structure would be more efficient. A small board deciding on the number and nature of the TLPs, and deciding on lead teams for each. But I also understand the will of long-time managers to keep some of their well-earned Gentoo status and be a board member and a project lead at the same time. I would be glad to hear from current managers about a board/projectlead separation system, just to know if I'm completely way out - I understand the need for using the trademark and keeping some of the cash flow generated by the Gentoo store, so I won't comment on that -- Thierry Carrez (koon) -- gentoo-nfp@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
RE: [gentoo-nfp] I met with my lawyer Daniel Robbins <drobbins@g.o>