Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Michael Palimaka <kensington@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o, gentoo-nfp@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-project] Gentoo metastructure reform - reality and SPI
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 20:03:24
Message-Id: 0f7e2c94-fda3-7a69-8586-0f874d1bd5a8@gentoo.org
1 There has been a lot of debate recently regarding Gentoo’s
2 metastructure. In response to this, there have been various proposals
3 for reform. These other proposals appear to be focused on changing the
4 way Gentoo operates to conform with a traditional corporate structure.
5 I’d like to make an alternative proposal - change the organisational
6 structure to conform with how Gentoo actually operates.
7
8 Let’s first consider the proposed metastructure of another proposal
9 that’s currently being discussed:
10
11 |--Council--(various projects)
12 |
13 | |--Recruiting
14 Board --+--Comrel--|
15 | |--Something else
16 |
17 |--PR
18 | |--Releng (if recognized)
19 |--Infra--|
20 |--Portage (possibly)
21
22 This is a reasonable-looking traditional corporate structure, but Gentoo
23 is not a traditional corporation. Our primary purpose is to produce a
24 Linux distribution. The Gentoo Foundation exists to handles legal and
25 administrative matters and should serve the distribution, not the other
26 way around.
27
28 Despite the best efforts of the Board, the Foundation has repeatedly
29 been plagued with problems such as poor record-keeping and at one point
30 even fell into bad standing. I very much appreciate the work the
31 Trustees have put in (especially in recent months to try and straighten
32 everything out), but I have serious concerns about the Foundation’s
33 long-term prospects, let alone handing them more responsibilities and power.
34
35 Gentoo is a community-driven project lead by the Council, and we should
36 keep it that way. I therefore propose we follow the lead of other major
37 projects[0] and become associated with SPI[1], making use of their
38 various services[2] such as accepting donations, and holding funds and
39 other assets. As an associated project, Gentoo would retain its
40 independence - SPI would not own, govern, or otherwise control us.
41
42 SPI requires an associated project to have a liaison - a person who is
43 authorised to direct SPI on behalf of the project. I propose this person
44 be a Council member, selected from a vote of all Council members. Such a
45 person must receive at least 50% of total votes and no ‘no’ votes. If
46 this process fails to result in the selection of a liaison it will go to
47 a majority vote from all developers.
48
49 The new metastructure would look like this:
50
51 |-- SPI liaison
52 |
53 |
54 Council -- Various projects
55
56
57 [0] http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/
58 [1] http://www.spi-inc.org/
59 [2] http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/services/

Replies