| 1 |
On 06/17/13 21:54:08, Douglas Dunn wrote: |
| 2 |
> > GLEP 39 was originally voted in by all devs. The council has |
| 3 |
> previously |
| 4 |
> > decided it does not have the authority to change it. It might not |
| 5 |
> be |
| 6 |
> a |
| 7 |
> > bad idea to poll developers in connection to our yearly elections |
| 8 |
> on |
| 9 |
> if |
| 10 |
> > they still think GLEP 39 is current. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > Regards, |
| 13 |
> > Petteri |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> A good idea i think, but if we can come up with an |
| 17 |
> amendment/replacement |
| 18 |
> for glep 39 before then, it would be a perfect time to use the |
| 19 |
> opportunity |
| 20 |
> just to piggyback that vote for that change in with the yearly |
| 21 |
> council |
| 22 |
> election and kill 2 birds with one stone |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
A GLEP is a GLEP. A GLEP that obsoletes GLEP 39 can be proposed by |
| 26 |
anyone at any time. When/if it reaches council, they can determine |
| 27 |
that it needs a dev wide vote. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
There is no need to do anything in a hurry. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Regards, |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Roy Bamford |
| 35 |
(Neddyseagoon) an member of |
| 36 |
gentoo-ops |
| 37 |
forum-mods |
| 38 |
trustees |
Archives