Gentoo Archives: gentoo-nfp

From: "William L. Thomson Jr." <wltjr@g.o>
To: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-nfp@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-nfp] Points to Ponder for Sundays Meeting.
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:05:03
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-nfp] Points to Ponder for Sundays Meeting. by Chris Gianelloni
On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 15:25 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> One thing that has consistently been brought up is that there is > no representation for non-developers in the Foundation. The Gentoo > Foundation is supposed to be about the Gentoo community, not just a > selective and restricted subset of said community.
We likely then need to see about registration of non developers. I think knowing who is and isn't a member has been part of the issue. Even worse when it comes to the community. But I agree their should be a voice there and membership availability.
> I can see having some kind of "timeout" for membership, but it should > *not* be based on someone's role within the Gentoo developer community. > Perhaps participation in the Foundation should count.
Yes or based on voting. Last time you vote in a foundation related election, or matter if brought to the membership base for a vote. Then maybe inactive suspension ~1yr, and then automatic removal ~2yrs.  Removed members can rejoin via membership form previously mention, or some form of re-activation process, etc. Developers, staff members, and the rest would have automatic sign up for foundation. Or be part of recruitment process, quizzes, join foundation, ... Although that gets murky wrt to new foundation members. Since there should still likely be a 1yr requirement before qualification to vote. So how to determine activity or inactivity there would need to be addressed.
> Remember, the Gentoo Foundation is what drives Gentoo (the distribution) > or at least that's how it is supposed to be. Let's not think of things > backwards. The current ideas seem to stem from the idea that the > distribution controls the Foundation, when it should be the exact > opposite. The Foundation *should* be a proponent of the community. It > *should* take in what the community wants and try to steer the > development pool in that direction. It should be a catalyst for > positive change within Gentoo, not simply a reactionary body that does > nothing more than echo the wishes of the developer community.
Given the condition. First we must grow legs, then we can learn to stand, then walk, then run. Point being we have many issues to resolve. Not discounting any of the above, I agree with pretty much all of it. Right the foundation can barely deal with the smallest of tasks. I am not talking about a man power issue necessarily. But there are just so many issues to address. We really are in no position to play liaison or to steer things at this time, IMHO. We would like to work with and help out the council. And ideally long term take on the roles mentioned. However that might be something that we lay the foundation for, and subsequent boards, etc. Actually get to explore and see as a reality.
> Remember guys, you have the ability to rebuild the > Foundation how you see fit. Don't pass up this opportunity because of > history or the status quo. Do what you think is best and everybody else > be damned. ;]
And that's why we are trying to keep our focus narrow and on a single target at a time for now. We are some what multi-tasking. So it's not like we are all working on one thing. But we do have priorities. Of which after reinstatement. I am pretty sure is the by laws, and foundational matters like this. We just want to have a high completion, and success rate :) However as Roy stated, wrt to by laws and likely how the foundation operates in general. Might be a multi-step process as we fine tune the by laws, procedures, operations, etc. We are not perfect, there is much to be discussed and decided upon. Not to mention it's a balancing act with progress, and debate. So we very well might go back on things, as part of the fine tuning and tweaking process. -- William L. Thomson Jr. amd64/Java/Trustees Gentoo Foundation


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature