Re: [gentoo-project] Social Contract clean-up

[Matthew Thode]

On 18-03-26 19:54:51, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 7:30 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 9:14 PM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera
> > (klondike) <klondike@g.o> wrote:
> > >
> > > If you cvs annotate the index.xml file for the Gentoo Foundation on the
> > > old documentation CVS you'll find that such line was added by Corey
> > > Shields (cshields) on the first edition of the project page itself,
> > > revision 1.1 made on 26-March-2005 before GLEP-39 existed. According to
> > > that same page Corey was one of the members of the Board of the
> > Foundation.
> > >
> >
> > Well, that answers the first half of the question then.
> >
>
> Council is related to technical leadership, inter-project technical issues
> and issues impacting development, which can include disciplinary issues.
>
> Trustees look out for the long-term health of the project. This includes
> legal matters, social contract, and quite a few other things.
>
> I resigned after the initial trustees were appointed. It appears that the
> initial trustees had challenges making decisions and leading the project.
> However, while they might have been relatively "weak" and had very limited
> scope in practice (most likely due to being overwhelmed with their new
> responsibilities, learning to run a NFP, etc.which has a very high learning
> curve,) that does not mean that the trustees were intended to be passive in
> regards to the direction of the project. Non-technical issues that are
> large in scope should by default go to the trustees for direction.
>

Perhaps an alternative is to lead people (via documentation update) to
email either -project or -nfp lists based on need (technical or what I
guess I'll phrase as 'regulatory')?

-- 
Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)