| 1 |
A developer should always be able to say "no vote because I'm too busy |
| 2 |
coding and don't give a rat's ass about foundation politics" in a trustee |
| 3 |
election. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I am wary of putting more burdens on a developer than they are prepared |
| 6 |
for, and I oppose requiring developers to be foundation members or vice |
| 7 |
versa or staff or vice versa. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
This is why any requirements common to dev/staff/foundmember should be |
| 10 |
moved to a base role called "supporter" or something, and anything that is |
| 11 |
common (CoC agreement and adherance for example) should be consolidated |
| 12 |
into a common baseline, and then we can tack on whatever specifics might |
| 13 |
apply to the role in question, which will probably vary between |
| 14 |
staff/dev/foundmember. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:03 AM, William L. Thomson Jr. <wlt-ml@××××××.com> |
| 17 |
wrote: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> On Friday, October 14, 2016 4:57:37 PM EDT Robin H. Johnson wrote: |
| 20 |
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 12:51:45AM -0700, Raymond Jennings wrote: |
| 21 |
> > > forwarding and aliases ;) |
| 22 |
> > |
| 23 |
> > At that point, all it means is that a given person was a member of X |
| 24 |
> > group at some point presently or in the past, and it does not accurately |
| 25 |
> > reflect their present status. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Typically that was done via adding roles/groups to your signature. That |
| 28 |
> was |
| 29 |
> never a requirement nor any standard. Maybe it should be a requirement. |
| 30 |
> Anyone |
| 31 |
> with a @gentoo.org is required to maintain a list of projects they are a |
| 32 |
> member of as part of their email signature. Along with the GPG signing |
| 33 |
> requirement. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> Such as |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> -- |
| 38 |
> Dev/Staff Name |
| 39 |
> proj1/proj2/proj3/.... |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> -- |
| 43 |
> William L. Thomson Jr. |
| 44 |
> |
Archives