| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:39:03 -0400
|
| 5 |
Richard Freeman <rich@××××××××××××××.net> wrote:
|
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> Ferris McCormick wrote: |
| 8 |
> > And as I've said before, if we think a policy doesn't make sense, we |
| 9 |
> > can change it. But changing a policy that affects Council and then |
| 10 |
> > applying it retroactively gets tricky, because Council themselves are |
| 11 |
> > part of the approval process. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Nothing too tricky - council votes that the GLEP is to be modified |
| 14 |
> retroactively. A few folks complain. Life goes on. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> > Changing policy is a fairly lengthy |
| 17 |
> > procedure, but right now Council is on a one month clock to hold an |
| 18 |
> > election unless something changes. It still seems to me that Petteri |
| 19 |
> > has it right, and that it's better just to do it rather than talk about |
| 20 |
> > it. |
| 21 |
> > |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> What happens if we just do nothing and pretend it didn't happen? Most |
| 24 |
> likely, not much. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
We send the message to the community that policies don't much matter.
|
| 28 |
In this case, someone did bring up policy, so I don't see how we can
|
| 29 |
pretend it didn't happen.
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> Don't get me wrong - I'm not into dictatorships and I'm a big proponent |
| 32 |
> of democracy. If most devs really want another election, then let's get |
| 33 |
> it going. However, all of about 4-6 people (and not all devs) have |
| 34 |
> chimed in on this discussion, which suggests that most don't care. If |
| 35 |
> most devs don't care for a new election, wouldn't it just be a major |
| 36 |
> distraction to call for an election now? You'll have three months of a |
| 37 |
> lame-duck council and all kinds of decisions may get put off. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Not really, because the clock resets. So the election is for 12
|
| 41 |
months. That's pretty clear in the GLEP, I think.
|
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
> A few posters in this thread have suggested that they'll probably vote |
| 44 |
> for the exact same council, but it is just important that we follow the |
| 45 |
> process. Hopefully none of these posters are among those accusing |
| 46 |
> Gentoo of being bureaucratic - having an election just for the sake of |
| 47 |
> having an election when most folks don't want a change just seems like |
| 48 |
> an exercise in procedure. |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> I'm just trying to be pragmatic - the council was democratically |
| 51 |
> elected, and a new council will be elected in a few months. If the |
| 52 |
> council just went and disappeared I could see the need for an emergency |
| 53 |
> election to keep things going. However, at this point an election will |
| 54 |
> just delay stuff getting done. |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
> I think that an election now would be a mistake. However, if we really |
| 57 |
> want to survey the devs it wouldn't be a bad thing, although if anybody |
| 58 |
> other than the few of us cared strongly they could just post here. If |
| 59 |
> there really are a lot of devs who would like us to follow the letter of |
| 60 |
> the current GLEP 39 then I'd be all for an election. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
Regards,
|
| 63 |
Ferris
|
| 64 |
- --
|
| 65 |
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@g.o>
|
| 66 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux (Sparc, Devrel, Userrel, Trustees)
|
| 67 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 68 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
|
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkguGwkACgkQQa6M3+I///ciggCgkCqB/WFMB5v1z1H1SWrK8O1X
|
| 71 |
8rEAn1BqjKgYyMJFxCiUIBoeUAJkU/l1
|
| 72 |
=ydab
|
| 73 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives