Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@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 22:21:35
Message-Id: 1312323669.2901.4@NeddySeagoon
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Council discuss: overlapping council terms of two years by Markos Chandras
On 2011.08.02 22:50, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 08/02/2011 07:24 PM, Roy Bamford wrote: > > Team, > > > > The trustees are legally accountable and responsible for the > > operation of the Gentoo Foundation Inc. Some things in the bylaws > > are there to comply with statutes. > > > > The Gentoo council has no legal standing whatsoever, which I have > > already said (at FOSEDEM) makes me a little nervous as a trustee, > > since the council makes decisions on behalf of Gentoo that the > > Foundation would be held both accountable and responsible for. > There > > have been no issues with that, yet. > > The council is supposed to discuss and decides on technical or > project > wise issues. How can a technical decision violate laws etc? I can't > think on top of my head an issue that would expose Foundation. Can > you > please provide an example?
Any decision that has copyright, licence, or patent implications could expose the Foundation. Although, I do agree with Rich0 that the two bodies have worked well together, so it has not been an issue.
> > > > > Maybe its time to reorganise Gentoo along standard corporate lines > > again, as it was before drobbins left. If we go in that direction, > > the council becomes a technical committee that is part of the > > Foundation. GLEP39 is no longer needed and the Foundation bylaws > are > > amended to reflect the new structure. > > If we go in that direction, I see no point in having the Foundation > and > the Council as two separate entities. In this case it would make much > more sense to merge them.
Division of responsibilities is important, in the business world, its essential, and the Foundation is first and foremost a business, even if its directors and officers are not paid. The Foundation does not get any special treatment from the state of New Mexico, nor the IRS and friends. It would be unethical if the council could vote funds for a council devised project. Likewise, trustees need business administration skills rather than technical skills and should not determine the technical direction of Gentoo. To enforce the division of responsibilities, the Foundation has a bylaw that prevents a trustee from concurrently serving on the council. I'm suggesting that the informal interdependencies that are present between the council and the foundation be formalised along the lines of a standard corporation.
> I don't quite like the idea though.
Would you care to expand on that?
> -- > Regards, > Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 >
-- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees