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 1LXVZm-0001DP-4E for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 07:01:34 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5484EE043D; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 07:01:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30FAFE043D for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 07:01:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (c-98-246-79-112.hsd1.or.comcast.net [98.246.79.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF06F64009; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 07:01:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 23:01:31 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz To: Tobias Scherbaum Cc: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Re: [gentoo-dev] Council size & terms [WAS] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for January 22 Message-ID: <20090212070130.GA3764@comet> References: <20090121233526.GA15870@comet> <20090122000229.GF15870@comet> <1232644991.4164.19.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> <20090122173755.GC20446@comet> <1232647041.4164.33.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> 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="GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1232647041.4164.33.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Archives-Salt: e5bc729d-a139-4b23-a1bb-f8c2cf5c0b7f X-Archives-Hash: 9a1c1a9eb1e36e18574edaa9553a90d0 --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 18:57 Thu 22 Jan , Tobias Scherbaum wrote: > Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > > I'm in favor of a fixed size of council members, I'd like to see at > > > least 5 council members *if* developers want to change the size. > >=20 > > What is your reasoning for this? >=20 > To make sure different views are represented in council's decisions and > to make sure the decisions are well-balanced. This can be partially > accomplished with having, say, 3 council members, of course - but well, > it's 5 to make sure.=20 Listening to different views can also be accomplished by simply having=20 an open discussion before making a decision. I don't think there is any=20 requirement that these views are reflected in a decision, just that they=20 are considered (and perhaps discarded). --=20 Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkmTyUoACgkQXVaO67S1rtsJigCfYoT/tEO4Qj4Gljae4fYziqe8 /OEAn3S9RpAGsC76ZkQfoStI8g3hZIEO =CxrP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw--