1 |
Joshua, |
2 |
|
3 |
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 14:29 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: |
4 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
5 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
6 |
> |
7 |
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:21:58 -0500 |
8 |
> "William L. Thomson Jr." <wltjr@g.o> wrote: |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > Well if we like needed to reinstate the New Mexico entity. Or if that |
11 |
> > was moot. Or any other legal requirements before being able to apply, |
12 |
> > or be considered for acceptance. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Open Source projects are like cats, you can't herd them. We don't try |
15 |
> to. If your project comes to us and says, "our project" wants to do |
16 |
> foo... there ya go :). |
17 |
> |
18 |
> The New Mexico entity, once you decide to join SPI basically becomes a |
19 |
> redundant entity. Keep it if you like but it does not influence your |
20 |
> abilities to be part of SPI. |
21 |
|
22 |
Ok, it's being reinstated either way now. Worse case we can dissolve it |
23 |
later on. Or keep it around for some other reasons. Or fallback if we |
24 |
don't go with the SPI. |
25 |
|
26 |
> > > |
27 |
> > > Well see above. Board is an elected position and when picking your |
28 |
> > > Liaison remember that they effectively will control Gentoo's money. |
29 |
> > |
30 |
> > Things we need to discuss and decided upon. Offhand would be nice to |
31 |
> > have a remaining trustee board for Gentoo. With one designated as |
32 |
> > liaison, and others able to step in if that person needs to step down. |
33 |
> > Any decision approved by the group before the one liaison relays it to |
34 |
> > the SPI. Just some off the cuff thoughts. But really has to come from |
35 |
> > the community, either developer and user base. Or just developer. |
36 |
> |
37 |
> If I may be so bold. Your positions with your community should be about |
38 |
> who is best for the position and holds some level of "contributor" |
39 |
> status. |
40 |
|
41 |
Sure, and no worries on being bold. Please feel free, we are the ones |
42 |
seeking information and advice. |
43 |
|
44 |
> Developers are not always the best people (regardless of their hacking |
45 |
> skills) to give a checkbook. Let's just be honest :). |
46 |
|
47 |
True, it's just easier to identify how long a dev has been around verses |
48 |
a contributor. But I don't think there would be to much objection to |
49 |
someone outside the developer pool filling the positions. |
50 |
|
51 |
> I for example do zero hacking (in the core code) for PostgreSQL. |
52 |
> However I am recognized as one of the greater contributors for other |
53 |
> things that I do for the project. |
54 |
|
55 |
I think some of our user base isn't aware of all of our non-technical |
56 |
needs. I am not sure we have done the best to express our needs there. |
57 |
Areas we are also working on improving. |
58 |
|
59 |
> > |
60 |
> > Thanks much for all of your info Joshua. I think I have most all I |
61 |
> > need to know now. We just need to figure out our course of action. |
62 |
> > |
63 |
> |
64 |
> No sweat. That is why I am here. |
65 |
|
66 |
Much appreciated. |
67 |
|
68 |
-- |
69 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
70 |
Gentoo/amd64/Java |