1 |
On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 6:03 PM, Matthew Thode |
2 |
<prometheanfire@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> On 01/14/2017 03:43 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>> Motivation: In recent vivid debates the Gentoo metastructure and the |
6 |
>> responsibilities of its organs have been called into question by a vocal |
7 |
>> minority. Compared with how the distribution has been running over the last |
8 |
>> years, most of the proposals aim to adapt reality to organizational |
9 |
>> structures. This proposal instead aims - in a very similar way as Michael's |
10 |
>> SPI proposal - to adapt organizational structures to reality. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> I don't think I agree with this, characterizing my proposal as adapting |
13 |
> reality to organizational structures is the exact opposite of what I'm |
14 |
> trying to achieve. I'd go as far as to say we both want to adapt |
15 |
> organizational structures to reality, and each of us may see that as |
16 |
> different. For me it's the legal reality. |
17 |
|
18 |
Honestly, saying that the Trustees legally have authority over the |
19 |
Council is a bit like saying that the MPAA legally has authority over |
20 |
anybody downloading torrents. Sure, they can go to a court, spend |
21 |
$20k, fight a battle for a few years, and end up with a judgment on |
22 |
one narrow issue. But, in the end everybody else just keeps doing |
23 |
what they're going to do. |
24 |
|
25 |
Ultimately the decision of who is to be entrusted to what is going to |
26 |
come down to the developers, because if they don't respect the |
27 |
authority of somebody trying to wield it then they're not going to |
28 |
invest in Gentoo. |
29 |
|
30 |
I think owning some IP and being able to pay bills is useful, but |
31 |
these are not the things that cause us to donate our efforts to |
32 |
Gentoo, or choose to run it. |
33 |
|
34 |
> |
35 |
> Administration following technical requirements is mostly fine, however, |
36 |
> when a technical person tells the foundation to do something that's not |
37 |
> allowed then at that point it makes sense for things to be dictated in |
38 |
> the other direction. |
39 |
> |
40 |
|
41 |
Honestly, I don't see why the Council would be any more likely to |
42 |
direct people to do things that are illegal than the Trustees would |
43 |
be. If we want legal advice it would make far more sense to retain |
44 |
legal counsel, or maybe work with an organization that does so. |
45 |
|
46 |
To date, on what matter has the Council ever directed anybody to do |
47 |
anything illegal, or failed to take advice from the Trustees. |
48 |
|
49 |
The whole purpose of the Council is to take advice from other bodies |
50 |
which sometimes have more expertise on narrow topics, and find |
51 |
solutions that work for all of us. |
52 |
|
53 |
> I'm not sure I agree with [C]. I don't think the Foundation is looking |
54 |
> to tell the council what to do in purely technical matters, only in |
55 |
> matters that have some bearing in a legal or financial way. |
56 |
|
57 |
There seems to be a misconception that the Council is solely a technical body. |
58 |
|
59 |
All our meeting summaries are logged, including all votes/decisions |
60 |
made. Go through the last two years, and cite some examples of |
61 |
decisions that the Council has made that were purely technical in |
62 |
nature? About the closest thing to that are approving EAPIs, and a |
63 |
LOT of the discussion/feedback on that comes from the PMS team and |
64 |
from the lists/etc, as it should. |
65 |
|
66 |
> Much has been said about [D] for why the Foundation should not oversee |
67 |
> Gentoo as a whole (even though legally that's what we already do...). |
68 |
> In the past the Foundation has been lax in renewal of some things, but I |
69 |
> do believe that this is something that is firmly in the past. It has |
70 |
> not been the case for years. |
71 |
|
72 |
While it is true that we haven't let some of our major items lapse, in |
73 |
general the Foundation struggles just to keep its books straight (and |
74 |
would probably be in fairly dire straits if it weren't for Robin's |
75 |
fairly heroic efforts). Also, in several recent years there hasn't |
76 |
even been a Trustee election due to a lack of candidates, and when |
77 |
there have been elections it is usually 3 people running for 2 seats. |
78 |
The work the Trustees do is important, but it is hard to say that they |
79 |
have a huge mandate when almost nobody wants the job. In contrast in |
80 |
a typical Council election all the seats are up for grabs, most of the |
81 |
winning candidates bother to write manifestos, and in most years there |
82 |
are about half a dozen candidates who do not win. Most of the big |
83 |
debates over how the distro ought to be managed tend to take place in |
84 |
the context of the Council election as well. |
85 |
|
86 |
Another way of looking at it is this: We struggle to find enough |
87 |
people who want to take care of the bills/filings/etc. We will |
88 |
struggle even more to find people who both want to do that, and are |
89 |
trusted to manage overall decisions around how Gentoo operates. |
90 |
|
91 |
> Antagonism from either side isn't going to help things move along but |
92 |
> probably distract from actual goals (like this email probably is). |
93 |
|
94 |
I don't see how a proposal for the Council to oversee the Trustees is |
95 |
any more antagonistic than a proposal for the Trustees to oversee the |
96 |
Council. |
97 |
|
98 |
And the situation would be about the same as it would be under an |
99 |
umbrella org, since most likely the team coordinating with such |
100 |
organizations would fall under the Council. |
101 |
|
102 |
I personally tend to prefer the SPI-like approach because it puts the |
103 |
focus on running a distro, and not on running a corporation. |
104 |
|
105 |
-- |
106 |
Rich |