Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Council meeting Sunday 10/June/2018 18:00 UTC
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2018 15:24:40
Message-Id: 5276585.i7BZcjErNl@monkey
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Council meeting Sunday 10/June/2018 18:00 UTC by "Andreas K. Huettel"
1 On Friday, June 8, 2018 2:02:42 PM EDT Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
2 > Am Freitag, 8. Juni 2018, 19:44:00 CEST schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
3 > > Dear all,
4 > >
5 > > the Gentoo Council will meet again this sunday, 10 June 2018, 18:00 UTC on
6 > > the #gentoo-council IRC channel.
7 > >
8 > > Please reply to this e-mail with agenda item proposals.
9 >
10 > I would like to put the following proposal on the agenda once more
11 > (clarified and expanded):
12 >
13 > The Gentoo council shall directly contact "Software in the Public Interest
14 > Inc." (SPI), with the intention of Gentoo becoming a SPI Associated Project.
15 > The intention is for SPI to become an *additional* service provider of the
16 > Gentoo developer community for Accepting Donations, Holding Funds, and
17 > Holding Assets. The SPI project liaison shall be appointed by the Gentoo
18 > council.
19 >
20 > No transfer of funds or assets of any kind between SPI and the Gentoo
21 > Foundation is stipulated (it would be the trustees' responsibility anyway),
22 > so any (dys)function of the Gentoo Foundation has no impact on this new
23 > business relationship. Equally, the business relationship with SPI shall
24 > have no impact on the current function of the Gentoo Foundation.
25 > Essentially, the proposal is that we start with an empty account at SPI.
26 > (I'll be happy to make the first donation.)
27 >
28 >
29 > SPI does not require exclusivity; the company explicitly allows that a
30 > project is also sponsored by further parties. As long as SPI does not
31 > publicly represent Gentoo, there is no conflict regarding trademarks. Most
32 > SPI associated projects are unincorporated associations of individuals, as
33 > is the Gentoo developer community electing the Gentoo Council.
34 >
35 > As additional bonus, we will be gaining that donations to SPI are tax-
36 > deductible both in the US and in the EU.
37 >
38 > The precise procedure for appointing the project liaison is up to debate; a
39 > draft proposal can be found below.
40 > ==
41 > a) The project liaison is a Gentoo developer appointed by the Gentoo
42 > council, and bound to follow its instructions.
43 > b) Appointment of the project liaison is by vote of the majority of council
44 > members (i.e. >=4 votes). The only way to unseat the project liaison is to
45 > appoint a different project liaison by vote.
46 > c) Officers and trustees of the Gentoo Foundation are not eligible for
47 > project liaison.
48
49 Given that this could potentially be viewed an a step forward in negating the
50 purpose of the Gentoo Foundation I find it wise the consider the following:
51
52 No sitting council members may be appointed to the project liaison
53 role. If this individual is under the strict instruction of the council this
54 there is no purpose for a dual-hatted individual. As such, the project
55 laision should be capable of disagreement with the council and not fear
56 retribution by being unseated. This position should be highly coveted as it
57 will *directly* impact the current and future health of *our* project.
58
59 Additionally, the project liaison should be given some avenue of reprisal.
60 First thought would be to introduce an all hands developer vote be called to
61 unseat that project liaison.
62
63 e.g. council appointed, but developer community removed.
64
65 Again, this proposal *could* potentially be a step forward in negating the
66 Foundation's purpose. As such, it is important that the dev community be
67 aware of what is happening and why. Disagreements between the council and
68 their appointed liaison should not be simply squashed by introducing a new
69 liaison who will blindly do things the way the council wants.
70
71 While I do not disagree with the SPI proposal I find it best that all proper
72 checks and balances be in place. If SPI can offer stability for our
73 intellectual property, donations, finances, etc then it would be the correct
74 move.
75
76 Ultimately, we *ought* to ensure that it is done the proper way. Please put
77 the proper checks and balances in place.
78
79 > d) The restriction of c) can be lifted permanently by Gentoo council
80 > majority decision only after the council, the Gentoo Foundation trustees,
81 > and the board of the financial sponsor organization have come into
82 > agreement that * the financial situation of the Gentoo Foundation has been
83 > sufficiently clarified,
84 > * any outstanding taxes have been determined and paid, and
85 > * any further outstanding relevant business of the Gentoo Foundation, i.e.,
86 > with the IRS, has been concluded.
87 > ==

Attachments

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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] Council meeting Sunday 10/June/2018 18:00 UTC "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o>