| 1 |
On 22/02/20 05:39, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 2020-02-21 at 22:11 +0000, Roy Bamford wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 2020.02.21 09:19, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On Thu, 2020-02-20 at 22:24 +0100, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> Alec Warner schrieb: |
| 6 |
>>>> |
| 7 |
>>>>> I'm a little bit concerned that this addresses the symptoms |
| 8 |
>>> instead of the problem. Have you shared your concerns with comrel |
| 9 |
>>> regarding their lack of timely communication on reported issues? Do |
| 10 |
>>> they even share the same goals you enumerated? |
| 11 |
>>>>> My strawperson argument is that: |
| 12 |
>>>>> - (0) The council will elect some lead. |
| 13 |
>>>>> - The lead will never write reports (or write them but stop.) |
| 14 |
>>>>> - The lead will get removed per policy. |
| 15 |
>>>>> - Council will elect a new lead. |
| 16 |
>>>>> - GOTO 0 |
| 17 |
>>>> My suggestion is in that case of missed report deadline, Council |
| 18 |
>>> asks for |
| 19 |
>>>> volunteers from the developer community to step up, and appoints two |
| 20 |
>>> of them |
| 21 |
>>>> to go through ComRel records and produce the transparency report. |
| 22 |
>>>> |
| 23 |
>>>> Regular independent review of ComRel activity is what NeddySeagoon |
| 24 |
>>> and I |
| 25 |
>>>> originally suggested and discussed with ComRel a while back. But |
| 26 |
>>> they seemed |
| 27 |
>>>> completely against it, so we eventually dropped it. |
| 28 |
>>>> |
| 29 |
>>> All things considered, maybe creating a separate 'revision' group |
| 30 |
>>> would |
| 31 |
>>> be better, independently of the reports. Either split ComRel in two, |
| 32 |
>>> or |
| 33 |
>>> appoint something independent. Let 'core' ComRel do their work, while |
| 34 |
>>> the 'revision' group merely monitor their activities without getting |
| 35 |
>>> directly involved in the process. |
| 36 |
>> This 'revision' group alread exists. Its called the Gentoo council. |
| 37 |
>> Unless, that is, council have no oversight of comrel? |
| 38 |
> No, that's not how things work. You don't have an appeal body |
| 39 |
> proactively look into what all projects are doing. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
Why not? An appeal has specific information that the review body won't |
| 42 |
ordinarily have access to? Or so I would expect? |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
We're not expecting council to actively be a part of ComRel, just monitor |
| 45 |
it? Or does that take away from council simply being a passive body? |
Archives