Re: [gentoo-project] William Hubbs council manifesto 2018-2019

[M. J. Everitt]

On 17/06/18 19:24, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 2:15 PM M. J. Everitt <m.j.everitt@×××.org> wrote:
>> completely eradicating the Board, Trustees and Officers such that the day-to-day
>> organisational aspects of Gentoo either moves to the Council (*shudders*)
> How is this different from making the Council subordinate to the
> Trustees?  As far as I can tell they're equivalent, except the name of
> the position is different.  You have one group that has the final say
> on everything.  Anybody could run to be on that body.
>
> Or are you more in favor of having two independent bodies with neither
> being subordinate to the other?  That would be a different structure.
>
I think it broadly comes down to establishing what the mandate of
any/each of the "departments" of Gentoo do, and what (legal)
responsibilities they do/do not carry. There are already issues with
developers not being able to serve on certain aspects of an
organisation, and I think simply pushing those posts around won't solve
any of today's difficulties...

Alec has touched on another issue .. whilst a New Mexico state
organisation may have served drobbins in the past, is an equivalent
suitable for the Gentoo of today. Many of today's active developers
(with no intentional slant) are European based rather than US-based, and
perhaps it may be time to consider whether perhaps the eV organisation
might be a better 'base' for Gentoo as a distribution. OK, I get that
legal defences are stronger in the US, but if there aren't enough active
US participants, is this really a sustainable situation worth pursuing?
If so, how can we encourage more support in this area, if not, what are
our options (thinking as broadly as possible) .. to be as inclusive as
possible for the current "workforce" and taking into account the
domiciles of recently recruited developers, prospective devs aka. proxy
maintainers, etc...