| 1 |
On Sun, 2019-07-14 at 10:59 -0400, Aaron Bauman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:25:55PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sat, 2019-07-13 at 22:15 +0100, Roy Bamford wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> <snip> |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> > > Maybe an example will help? |
| 8 |
> > > What group or individual within Gentoo will determine if directing |
| 9 |
> > > the umbrella to buy a Power9 system for the distro is a good idea |
| 10 |
> > > or not. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > The Council, obviously. As it should be doing it today, except by some |
| 13 |
> > weird mistake Foundation decides to skip it entirely and authorize |
| 14 |
> > technical decisions on its own. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> What? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Buying an asset requires monies which requires some legal body with |
| 20 |
> representatives to purchase said item. Roy's example above was not a "technical" |
| 21 |
> decision. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Entertaining the response though, you *could* break this into (2) separate |
| 24 |
> authorizations... |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> 1. Project $x requests a Power9 machine from council |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> 2. the council says/agrees we need a Power9 machine to carry out some technical |
| 29 |
> function submitted for from project $x |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> 3. They authorize said procurement of a Power9 machine |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> 4. The "purse holder" (current Foundation or umbrella) goes and buys said Power9 |
| 34 |
> machine. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> That is really not neccasary though. No different then how the Foundation just |
| 37 |
> purchases the new sparc asset. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
That's exactly the model I would like to pursue. For each purchase |
| 41 |
request, Council authorizes the purpose, while Trustees authorize |
| 42 |
the finances. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
Best regards, |
| 46 |
Michał Górny |
Archives