Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:43:21
Message-Id: 20110802154256.GA5661@linux1
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years by Fabian Groffen
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 08:36:33AM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 01-08-2011 23:24:56 +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: > > As I've expressed already a few times, I strongly disagree with the > > Council being able to change the rules that govern it. In my view, this > > topic belongs to a reform of GLEP39. > > > > Also, as documented on the last meeting's summary[1], the current > > council voted on not being able to update GLEP39: > > > > Donnie asked for a clarification by the council members on whether they > > think a global dev vote is required to update GLEP39 or not. The > > council voted 5 yes and 1 no that the council can't change GLEP39 as it > > requires a full developer vote. > > > > [1] - > > > > Right, which means to me that if the council agrees on a certain change > to GLEP39, it has to organise a full developer vote with all the > supporting material for the change.
But, you are saying that the council has to approve changes for glep 39 before they can come to a vote. This would mean that say a majority of developers doesn't like something in glep 39, but the council doesn't approve the change. That change will never come to a vote. In other words, the council has control of the rules that govern it. Is that what you are intending? William