Gentoo Archives: gentoo-nfp

From: Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@g.o>
To: gentoo-nfp@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-nfp] Upcoming elections
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:24:57
In Reply to: [gentoo-nfp] Re: [gentoo-core] Upcoming elections by Stuart Herbert
Stuart Herbert wrote: [Mon Apr 11 2005, 12:39:51PM CDT]
> Grant Goodyear wrote: > | We need to start collecting members pretty soon. My suggested > | guidelines for membership are: > | > | 1. Members must be currently active Gentoo developers who have been > | developers for at least a year. > > I'd prefer this to be all developers / documenters / infra monkeys who > have completed their probation period. It seems discriminatory to allow > people to commit to the tree, but to not be eligible for membership of > the Foundation.
The role of the foundation is to (a) protect Gentoo intellectual property and (b) collect and disburse funds. My thought was that both tasks require a fairly deep understanding of Gentoo which a newly-minted dev probably wouldn't have, but I'm certainly willing to listen to arguments for why I'm wrong.
> | 2. Members must have requested membership. If you don't want to be > | a member of the foundation, you shouldn't have to be. (Indeed, the > | actual role of the foundation is quite limited.) > > Why not put in place automatic membership for all developers / > documenters / infra monkeys who have completed their probation period?
Well, right now the proposed bylaws require 1/3 of the members to be present for voting to be valid, meaning over 100 people. I'm a tad worried that it would be very difficult to reach a quorum, and that it would be even more difficult if people who did not necessarily want to be involved in IP and budget issues are automatic members. If you have a better solution, I'm certainly interested. -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer g2boojum@g.o GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76