1 |
On 05-08-2011 11:33:52 +0100, Markos Chandras wrote: |
2 |
> > A smaller committee for a chief technical officer fits better into a |
3 |
> > normal corporate structure. A smaller council could form special |
4 |
> > interest groups to address individual problems so nothing would be |
5 |
> > lost from the reduced numbers. |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> FWIW, I support Donnie's idea. I would like to see a smaller and more |
8 |
> flexible Council which could assign tasks to interested parties. Right |
9 |
> now, it takes 3-4 months (that is 3-4 meetings) for a Council to decide |
10 |
> things and make substantial progress where other distributions are |
11 |
> moving faster by having a single developer or a small group leading the |
12 |
> project. In my point of view, we need to consider a fundamental change |
13 |
> to our organizational structure. Roy's ideas are very interesting, |
14 |
> however we need to decide on an abstract design before we dig into the |
15 |
> details. |
16 |
|
17 |
You really don't think the effectiveness of Council meetings should be |
18 |
improved, instead of just reducing the number of members and |
19 |
responsibilties, such that just one person is responsible for a |
20 |
decision? |
21 |
|
22 |
I am against the idea of having single people being able to easily make |
23 |
(possibly totally unfunded) decisions that affect Gentoo full project |
24 |
wide. |
25 |
|
26 |
On the one hand, I think too many issues are brought to the Council |
27 |
because people want to be put in their rights, or because they don't |
28 |
feel like digging out the details to make the right decision. |
29 |
|
30 |
On the other hand, Council members should discuss much more on lists, |
31 |
prior to meetings, ultimately resolving/deciding issues already before |
32 |
any meeting takes place. I see no direct need for centralised meetings |
33 |
at all to discuss on many topics. Voting could happen on a ML as good |
34 |
as on IRC. |
35 |
|
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
Fabian Groffen |
39 |
Gentoo on a different level |