| 1 |
On 19:25 Tue 09 Aug , Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 09-08-2011 09:05:31 -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Let's assume the following scenario: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > The developer base only wants 3 people on the council and disagrees with |
| 6 |
> > the views of the other 4. But since 7 are required to be on it, they |
| 7 |
> > must vote for 7 or get stuck in an infinite loop of reopening |
| 8 |
> > nominations. The undesired 4 people could block the other 3 from |
| 9 |
> > proposing any changes to GLEP 39. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> If the developer base wants that, it's probably not hard to find 7 |
| 12 |
> people to run for council and get elected, isn't it? I don't see the |
| 13 |
> block here. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The whole point is the ridiculous idea of this difference between a |
| 16 |
"community-pushed" GLEP 39 change and one promoted by a group of devs |
| 17 |
who happen to have a council member leading them. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
Thanks, |
| 21 |
Donnie |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Donnie Berkholz |
| 24 |
Council Member / Sr. Developer |
| 25 |
Gentoo Linux |
| 26 |
Blog: http://dberkholz.com |
Archives