1 |
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Matthew Thode |
2 |
<prometheanfire@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> On 11/06/2016 10:55 PM, Dean Stephens wrote: |
4 |
>> On 11/06/16 21:32, Alec Warner wrote: |
5 |
>>> The foundation currently has 1 member type (in the bylaws) but Gentoo |
6 |
>>> itself still seems to have 2 (Gentoo staff and Ebuild developer) |
7 |
>>> |
8 |
>> Which is a problem in exactly what way? What actual practical benefit is |
9 |
>> being sought by means of this proposal? |
10 |
>> |
11 |
> |
12 |
> The split in the pool of users/voters makes it hard to act as one unit. |
13 |
> One way of thinking about this change would be to have the Foundation as |
14 |
> the top level project (with ALL members), with council just beneath |
15 |
> (with DEV memebrs). |
16 |
|
17 |
I think it is a mistake to have the Trustees and Council elected by |
18 |
different bodies. This is just going to tend to create conflict |
19 |
between these groups because they end up having different |
20 |
constituencies. |
21 |
|
22 |
Right now developers without commit access already are allowed to |
23 |
become both Foundation members and vote for council. You're |
24 |
suggesting that they lose their rights to vote for Council members? |
25 |
That doesn't seem like an improvement. |
26 |
|
27 |
As long as the standards for becoming a non-committing |
28 |
staff/dev/whatever are the same as they are today, I don't really have |
29 |
a problem with most of the proposal as it is just the status quo. The |
30 |
only change I'd suggest is that when somebody is no longer |
31 |
staff/dev/whatever they lose their Foundation membership. |
32 |
|
33 |
I think that is important to keep the group of people voting for |
34 |
Council/Trustees the same as much as possible. Otherwise you're going |
35 |
to get even more reluctance for the two bodies to work together. |
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
Rich |