From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LPnuO-0000lb-0N for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:59:00 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0B6F1E032A; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:58:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7690E032A for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:58:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (xray.science.oregonstate.edu [128.193.220.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 757096474D; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:58:58 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:58:58 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz To: Ferris McCormick Cc: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Voting procedure Message-ID: <20090122005858.GH15870@comet> References: <1231419666.7249.0.camel@localhost> <20090121234527.GC15870@comet> <20090122004246.301b348f@anaconda.krait.us> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7SAgGoIHugoKhRwh" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090122004246.301b348f@anaconda.krait.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Archives-Salt: 5485cfe5-9bee-4fff-a9b8-927f612c6dac X-Archives-Hash: a593b415f2eaf929eb3ab892ea8a2acb --7SAgGoIHugoKhRwh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 00:42 Thu 22 Jan , Ferris McCormick wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:45:27 -0800 > Donnie Berkholz wrote: >=20 > > On 14:01 Thu 08 Jan , Tiziano M=FCller wrote: > > > So far we've introduced the _reopen_nominations person in the last vo= te > > > and it didn't change a lot. But there are more questions: > > >=20 > > > Does there always have to be 7 council members? > >=20 > > No. I think we should set 7 to be the maximum though -- big meetings ge= t=20 > > unwieldy. > >=20 > > > If not, should there be a minimum? > >=20 > > No. Gentoo developers can decide how they want to be led. > >=20 >=20 > So, zero is OK and so no Council at all? Or one? I think zero means you wouldn't have a council, so you'd violate GLEP=20 39. One would be allowable, although I'd be awfully surprised if it ever=20 happened. --=20 Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com --7SAgGoIHugoKhRwh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkl3xNIACgkQXVaO67S1rtvASACguGxQKxsGRDlYUlVciVmYAgWz CioAoKZZsAFA8PoZREhEvc6WJIHZjFMA =GEmM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7SAgGoIHugoKhRwh--