Re: [gentoo-project] Clarify language of GLEP 39

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Doug Freed <dwfreed@×××.edu> wrote:
> GLEP 39 currently states that "[A project] may have one or many leads"
> (Specification section, first list, last item).  I believe (and a few
> others agree) that this language is ambiguous,  Some projects have
> interpreted this language to mean that a project may have no lead,
> while others believe the language is to be interpreted as meaning that
> projects must have at least one lead.  Therefore, I request that the
> Council clarify the language of GLEP 39 to remove this ambiguity.  I
> offer up the following choices as possible replacements (though feel
> free to come up with your own):
>
> "It must have at least one lead, and may have many leads.  The leads
> are selected by the members of the project.  This selection must occur
> at least once every 12 months, and may occur at any time."
>
> OR (if the Council wishes to allow no lead as an option)
>
> "It may have no lead, one lead, or many leads, and the leads are
> selected by the members of the project.  This selection must occur at
> least once every 12 months, and may occur at any time."
>

I'll let dilfridge add it to the next agenda.

In case it is useful, this topic was discussed [1,2], but this
particular point was not the subject of a vote.  I do note that the
wiki now lists the date of the last election on the project template,
per the decision (thanks!).

Personally, I think that leads can be helpful, but I don't see a need
to force a team to elect one just for the sake of process.  I do think
that if a project is without a lead any project member can call for an
election (obviously not repeatedly if the project members decide not
to have one).

Besides, that leaves us with what to do about the failure to elect a
lead.  If a team is working well together it seems silly to force it
to disband simply because they didn't elect a lead.  My feeling is
that necessity is the mother of invention, and if a team needs
somebody to handle disputes they'll tend to pick one, and likewise if
somebody wants to step up and drive the project in some direction
they'll probably throw the hat in the ring.  If a project is dead then
it should be cleaned up, of course, unless it is useful simply has an
administrative device (parent project to organize subprojects, useful
way to group packages, etc).

In any case, discussion is welcome before the next Council meeting.

1 - https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20150913-summary.txt
2 - https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20150913.txt

-- 
Rich