| 1 |
On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 12:06:33AM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi William, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > I believe the council and trustees should be working as a team to lead |
| 5 |
> > Gentoo. We serve different functions, so there is room for both groups. |
| 6 |
> > We have been adversarial lately and I don't think this is good. As a |
| 7 |
> > council member, I will work to improve this situation. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> We (tamiko & me) asked the trustees formally to agree to the separation of |
| 10 |
> functions precisely as it has been handled over the past ~10 years. |
| 11 |
> They didn't agree to that. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> How would you like to see the separation of functions then? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The separation is pretty straight forward. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
- the council handles global technical issues and appeals from comrel/qa. |
| 18 |
- the trustees/foundation handle the business side (running the nfp that |
| 19 |
backs us). |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I read the proposal by prometheanfire a year ago also and do not quite |
| 22 |
see why it was so offensive to some. The way I read it it was |
| 23 |
basically making the council a committee in the foundation. The |
| 24 |
council would have still been elected by the developers, and it wasn't |
| 25 |
set up so the Trustees could remove people etc, so there wasn't really |
| 26 |
a way the trustees could control it any more than they control the |
| 27 |
council as it is. If I missed something, tell me. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Regarding comrel, given that more than one person who has been removed |
| 30 |
from Gentoo has threatened the foundation with law suits, I can |
| 31 |
understand the trustees wanting to be in that loop. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
William |
Archives