Re: [gentoo-project] Meeting agenda - Council meeting 2018-04-08

[Matthew Thode]

On 18-04-07 21:55:08, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Samstag, 7. April 2018, 21:33:57 CEST schrieb Matt Turner:
> > On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Matthias Maier <tamiko@g.o> wrote:
> > > 8. The council was requested to discuss and vote on the following motion
> > > [8]>
> > >       "The Gentoo council shall directly contact "Software in the Public
> > >       Interest
> > >       Inc." (SPI), with the intention of Gentoo becoming a SPI Associated
> > >       Project, independent of the Gentoo Foundation."
> >
> > The X.Org Foundation joined SPI recently, after failing to file its
> > taxes and losing its 501(c)(3) status. As far as I can tell everyone
> > has been pleased with the results, especially not having to deal with
> > the paperwork.
> >
> > But, what the fuck is going on? Perhaps if the Council is interested
> > in a topic they would spare a few keystrokes to explain the rationale
> > for such a change. From the perspective of someone who hasn't follow
> > the Foundation closely, this whole thread looks like a spat between
> > Council members and the Foundation trustees which is bizarre to say
> > the least.
>
> Well, if you ask 5 people you probably get 5 different descriptions...
>
> As far as I'm concerned, over the last months(?) the foundation trustees have
> repeatedly tried to expand their area of responsibility into things that have
> been handled by the council ever since I've been a developer. This is a bit
> bizarre given the checkered history of foundation leadership and the still
> unclear (though under repair) tax / finances status (their core competencies).
>
> Consequently, relations between (some of the) trustees and (some of the)
> council members have deteriorated to the point where I see the Gentoo
> Foundation as *sole* asset holder of the Gentoo distribution as a danger to
> the distribution. [*] [**]
>
> The easiest way to fix this situation is to find an additional, second
> financial sponsor *also* handling assets and donations for the Gentoo
> distribution, which is why I proposed that the Gentoo council contacts SPI.
>
> This does not take anything away from the Gentoo Foundation - the accounts are
> to be completely separate, with no transfer of assets between SPI and the
> Gentoo Foundation. I would sincerely welcome any further efforts from the side
> of the Gentoo Foundation trustees to complete their bookkeeping, conclude
> their open business with the IRS, and keep supporting the Gentoo distribution
> financially.
>
> [*] in #g-trustees: "<prometheanfire> [...] The trustees don't have to follow
> or recognise glep 39"
>

I think this quote is taken somewhat out of context (please don't do
that).

What I'm trying to say here is that, the trustees are not managed by the
metastructure.  The trustees manage the project (specifically the
business areas).

> [**] I've had this proposal in my mind already for some months, but hesitated
> to post it. However, when Daniel Robbins started playing the trustees against
> the council again, the situation deteriorated fast.
>

attribution?   Who said this?

-- 
Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)