Re: [gentoo-council] Re: [gentoo-dev] Council size & terms [WAS] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for January 22

["Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 18:23 Thu 22 Jan     , Tobias Scherbaum wrote:
>> Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>>> Discuss on-list before meeting
>>> ---------------------------------------
>>> - Council meta stuff (-council)
>>>   - Can the size change? Minimum? Maximum?
>>>   - Should we have 2-year staggered terms?
>> 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.
> 
> What is your reasoning for this?

Until we decide to change the council/TLP structure (more on that
later), allowing the council to become one individual is not an option -
imho.

>> I dislike the idea of stretched 2-year terms, instead I prefer having 
>> 1-year staggered terms (voting every 6 months and replace 3 or 4 
>> council members). This would allow to put open council slots into the 
>> next election, we wouldn't need to hold extra elections for open slots 
>> then.
> 
> As I mentioned on the -council voting thread, I am concerned about a 
> constant influx of new members every 6 months making it very difficult 
> to make any progress. Do you think that won't be a problem? If so, what 
> makes you think that?
> 
>> Anyways, this is something we can discuss - but as a change to the
>> voting procedure most likely does change or extend what's written down
>> in GLEP 39 I'd like to see a election on those changes.
> 
> I'm assuming you mean a vote by all Gentoo devs, since an election 
> generally involves voting for a person rather than a policy.

We need to create a way to hold referendums - one of the goals of a
gentoo elections project that I keep delaying sending an email to
kick-start.

> Just as a point of reference, the council has voted to change GLEP 39 in 
> the past. I definitely feel that we need to hold this discussion 
> publicly and get input from everyone. I think the council should then 
> take all this input into consideration and vote upon it.

This is something that was touched about when the election for the
current council was decided as a consequence of GLEP 39, but that wasn't
discussed as thoroughly as it should have been.
My opinion is that any rule/decree/... that institutes our
"meta-structure", including the "governing body" (council for now),
should require a new referendum to amend and must not allow the
governing body to "touch it". This rule/decree/... should institute the
bare minimum rules (a minimum number of meetings per year, obligation to
hold public meetings and take input from the dev community, but not to
follow it, etc), but should leave specific organization details for the
council members.

- --
Regards,

Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / SPARC / KDE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkl5uyMACgkQcAWygvVEyALqTQCghRviD8vlfUgjI6FnNBZnf8h2
GcUAoIzZmKqWMIUETseHLOT9cBhdWQDx
=oLl1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----