* Re: [gentoo-council] Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009
2009-07-27 14:46 ` Ned Ludd
@ 2009-07-27 18:56 ` Petteri Räty
2009-07-29 1:32 ` Donnie Berkholz
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Petteri Räty @ 2009-07-27 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-council
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1499 bytes --]
Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 19:06 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> On 23:54 Fri 24 Jul , Denis Dupeyron wrote:
>>> The log and summary of Monday's council meeting (July 20th 2009) are
>>> now available on the council project page at:
>>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/
>> 3. GLEP 39
>>
>> 3.1. Can the council decide on the process of voting amendments to GLEP 39
>> without an all-developers vote?
>> > No: betelgeuse, dertobi123, solar, ulm.
>> > Yes: calchan, leio.
>>
>>
>> I'd like some clarification here. GLEP 39 has already been amended by
>> the council [1]. Are you declaring those modifications illegal and thus
>> reverted? If so, this is retroactive because it changes the past and
>> removes powers that were assumed by previous councils. Are you voting to
>> remove powers the council previously had? If so, isn't that in itself an
>> amendment of GLEP 39?
>>
>> 1. http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.html?r1=1.2&r2=1.3
>
> My personal take on it. Is rather that we mostly all agree the council
> does not have the power to modify GLEP-39 as is. If the previous
> councils altered GLEP-39 and there are no challenges to it, then I don't
> think the existing one is going to revert those changes (more so if we
> admit that the existing one should leave it alone)
>
I also think that we were voting about how GLEP 39 is as it currently
stands.
Regards,
Petteri
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 261 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-council] Council meeting summary of July 20th 2009
2009-07-27 14:46 ` Ned Ludd
2009-07-27 18:56 ` Petteri Räty
@ 2009-07-29 1:32 ` Donnie Berkholz
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Donnie Berkholz @ 2009-07-29 1:32 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Ned Ludd; +Cc: Denis Dupeyron, gentoo-council
On 07:46 Mon 27 Jul , Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 19:06 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > On 23:54 Fri 24 Jul , Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> > > The log and summary of Monday's council meeting (July 20th 2009) are
> > > now available on the council project page at:
> > > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/
> >
> > 3. GLEP 39
> >
> > 3.1. Can the council decide on the process of voting amendments to GLEP 39
> > without an all-developers vote?
> > > No: betelgeuse, dertobi123, solar, ulm.
> > > Yes: calchan, leio.
> >
> >
> > I'd like some clarification here. GLEP 39 has already been amended by
> > the council [1]. Are you declaring those modifications illegal and thus
> > reverted? If so, this is retroactive because it changes the past and
> > removes powers that were assumed by previous councils. Are you voting to
> > remove powers the council previously had? If so, isn't that in itself an
> > amendment of GLEP 39?
> >
> > 1. http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.html?r1=1.2&r2=1.3
>
> My personal take on it. Is rather that we mostly all agree the council
> does not have the power to modify GLEP-39 as is. If the previous
> councils altered GLEP-39 and there are no challenges to it, then I don't
> think the existing one is going to revert those changes (more so if we
> admit that the existing one should leave it alone)
Here's my take on things. I think that changes to GLEP 39 that "fix" it
are fine (in other words, amendments). Most developers aren't lawyers
looking for every little loophole, they just vote on the basic model
they want; so the council should respect that by making that basic model
as good as it can be.
But switching to a different governance model should get a global vote
by all developers -- not because it's required to, but out of a basic
respect for our developers and a desire to run Gentoo in a way that
people want it run.
--
Thanks,
Donnie
Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread