Re: [gentoo-project] Groups under the Council or Foundation: the structure & processes thereof

[M. J. Everitt]

On 13/11/16 12:33, Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 13/10/2016 01:30, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> TL;DR: move comrel, infra, PR to Foundation. Have strict(er)
>> application of policies to them in line with their powers.
> The foundation was made only to collect and redistribute money. In order
> to do that it was made sort of copyright collector as well (but that was
> actively blocked by the fact the EU law prevents that).
>
> In short and sweet summary:
>
> - The Council was made to be the team leading Gentoo, we have elections
> for that reason.
> - Recruitment should get new wonderful people as Developers, either by
> inviting them or by vetting them.
> - Comrel is offloading from the council the management of conflicts
> between developers. Incidentally it had to manage also troublemakers,
> creeps, and other horrible people that the recruitment process failed to
> recognize as such (luckily happened really few times).
> - Q/A is offloading from the council the management of day-by-day
> technical issues and possibly prevent people not so skilled from destroy
> systems.
> - Foundation should just care of money on behalf of the council and not
> interfere with the community.
>
> Giving the Foundation more power than act as financial operations is a
> quite bad idea to me.
>
> lu
>
EWW .. forgive my boldness, but that is the Exact Opposite of what needs
to happen. What you are, in effect, proposing, is that for all intents
and purposes, you can merge the Function of the foundation INTO council.
Why keep them separate if the legal body is the Council and it is
adequately ratified by its developers, but yet not the general community
and membership at large. This only goes to reinforce the status quo that
the council is a self-serving self-reinforcing body.... A single-headed
monster if you will.

Sorry, whilst historical precedent might be thus, I strongly feel that
this idea is NOT the way forward.