Re: [gentoo-project] On the way Devrel is constituted

[Alexis Ballier]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:18:49 +0200
hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote:
[...]
> Who controls devrel?
> Simple answer: no one.

And this is good IMHO. Judiciary should be an independent power.

> The only thing that can stop devrel is the council, which has some
> kind of veto right. But that is not enough to guarantee that an entity
> with that kind of power/authority/responsibility consists of people
> who are capable of that task.

It might be good to have a way to demote someone from devrel if he is
abusing his powers. It can probably already be done by talking to other
devrel members. So far, I've never seen any need for it.

> It's a self-maintaining project without any logical connection between
> the legitimation of the project and the legitimation of the members.
> There is no rotation of members which is absolutely crucial for a
> position like that.

I don't see why there should be a rotation: Such a rotation might just
make people try to get as much as they can from their new powers until
they are "rotated". If people are seriously involved with devrel,
handle impartially conflicts and are able to resolve them, why
replacing them?

> What is a possible solution?
> Let the council elect all members. That way the power still comes from
> the dev community, although they do not vote devrel directly. The
> council should vote anonymously, so that no connection between council
> member and elected devrel member can be drawn which could otherwise
> affect the election of the council.
> This system should prevent people from thinking two steps ahead when
> voting the council.

So that the council controls everything: they nominate the judges
(devrel) and are the appeal court. I consider this even worse.

Alexis.