Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Cc: comrel@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: comrel changes
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 09:19:20
Message-Id: 441737a3d1c0efdfc9f95b1cb1fde47b0f55d58f.camel@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: comrel changes by "Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn"
1 On Thu, 2020-02-20 at 22:24 +0100, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
2 > Alec Warner schrieb:
3 >
4 > > I'm a little bit concerned that this addresses the symptoms instead of the problem. Have you shared your concerns with comrel regarding their lack of timely communication on reported issues? Do they even share the same goals you enumerated?
5 > >
6 > > My strawperson argument is that:
7 > > - (0) The council will elect some lead.
8 > > - The lead will never write reports (or write them but stop.)
9 > > - The lead will get removed per policy.
10 > > - Council will elect a new lead.
11 > > - GOTO 0
12 >
13 > My suggestion is in that case of missed report deadline, Council asks for
14 > volunteers from the developer community to step up, and appoints two of them
15 > to go through ComRel records and produce the transparency report.
16 >
17 > Regular independent review of ComRel activity is what NeddySeagoon and I
18 > originally suggested and discussed with ComRel a while back. But they seemed
19 > completely against it, so we eventually dropped it.
20 >
21
22 All things considered, maybe creating a separate 'revision' group would
23 be better, independently of the reports. Either split ComRel in two, or
24 appoint something independent. Let 'core' ComRel do their work, while
25 the 'revision' group merely monitor their activities without getting
26 directly involved in the process.
27
28 --
29 Best regards,
30 Michał Górny

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: comrel changes Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: comrel changes Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o>