| 1 |
William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
| 2 |
> When I was thinking again about Gentoo's structure. The relationship of |
| 3 |
> the Foundation and the Council. I thought of an odd scenario. The |
| 4 |
> council rules the project, period. No contesting that and I am not |
| 5 |
> looking to change that. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I contest that the Foundation not only rules, but is Gentoo. It owns |
| 8 |
the assets and funds of Gentoo and it is it's responsibility that they |
| 9 |
are used appropriately. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> That said, the Council decides to take some action within Gentoo. That |
| 12 |
> decision and action requires funding. Now who's hands does the power lie |
| 13 |
> in? At that point the Trustees, and if they choose not to fund the |
| 14 |
> request. Then what? Council is denied their supreme authority. Hardly |
| 15 |
> ideal, and I believe goes against the purpose of the council. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
And what happens if the Council actions funding that is against the |
| 19 |
interests of Gentoo. Is the Foundation to blindly accept there decision. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> Case in point. Last year for the Florida Linux Show, I had to ask and |
| 22 |
> get Trustees approval to fund a booth at the show for Gentoo[1]. To me |
| 23 |
> that seems like a decision that should fall to the Council not the |
| 24 |
> Foundation. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Isn't the Council only interested in Gentoo Development? Why burden it |
| 27 |
with non-development related funding requests? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> The only time the Foundation should deny a funding request/order from |
| 31 |
> the council is if there is not adequate funds available. But it should |
| 32 |
> not be up to a second body what areas get funded and don't. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
The only time the Foundation should deny a funding request/order form |
| 35 |
from the Council is when |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
1) There is not adequate funds |
| 38 |
2) The request does not satisfy one of the Principles or Tasks of the |
| 39 |
Gentoo Foundation. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> The Foundation isn't running the project, why should they be in control |
| 43 |
> of what money is spent on. Now access and final payment, I think should |
| 44 |
> still go through the Foundation. But more as acting on the Council's |
| 45 |
> ruling or decision. Unless it's a totally insane request, there might be |
| 46 |
> some veto power in the request/order. But really it should not be up to |
| 47 |
> the Foundation. It's not it's mission to decide those things. Just |
| 48 |
> oversee and enact. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
I actually see very little difference between this and other threads on |
| 51 |
Gentoo's organisational structure. [1] One thing that I get the |
| 52 |
impression of, is that ppl think that just because one Group has the |
| 53 |
power it has to be the one to enforce it. The Foundation could quiet |
| 54 |
easily delegate some/all spending authority to the Council if it wishes. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
I would like the Foundation to have veto powers of nearly everything the |
| 57 |
Council does, but would expect the convention to be that the Foundation |
| 58 |
accepts decisions (automatically) by Council ( unless there is something |
| 59 |
really wrong with the decision ). I have also detailed ways to stop to |
| 60 |
much power from being held within the Foundations hands ( via Councils |
| 61 |
right to call Foundation elections and vice-versa ). |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
Alistair |
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
[1] |
| 66 |
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_5e369c64711639bbcde1671313ea933a.xml |
| 67 |
-- |
| 68 |
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives