From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MMbNw-0004be-Kb for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 03 Jul 2009 05:32:32 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EBCC3E0475; Fri, 3 Jul 2009 05:32:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAF6DE0475; Fri, 3 Jul 2009 05:32:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.69] (bl8-214-118.dsl.telepac.pt [85.241.214.118]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2581F67E7F; Fri, 3 Jul 2009 05:32:29 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4A4D97D5.10407@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 05:32:05 +0000 From: "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090627) 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 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org CC: Ned Ludd , gentoo-council Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] A Little Council Reform Anyone? References: <1246502033.5688.40.camel@localhost> <1246546445.6186.33.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> <1246546840.6186.35.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> In-Reply-To: <1246546840.6186.35.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 29bc5d39-0168-45eb-b315-a189dfffc2cb X-Archives-Hash: 070680fa5b04056a4a48b944cb4725fa Tobias Scherbaum wrote: > Alec Warner wrote: >>> What I'd like to see for sure is a formal rule on who can decide to >>> modify or change parts of glep 39. As it's the council's constitution >>> somehow, we have two options from my pov (besides that a former council >>> did decide the council itself can change it's rules): >>> - a large majority (at least 5 out of 7) of council members needs to ack >>> the change >>> - changes to glep 39 require a vote with all developers participating >>> and a large majority (2/3 or 3/4) needs to ack the suggested change >> Just FYI, Gentoo is lucky if 1/2 of the devs vote; so I assume here >> you mean large majority of the people who actually voted. > > Uhrm, yeah ... of course. I have a few ideas about this that I'll have to put in writing and share later, but let me start by proposing that for such a change we require the support of at least 2/3 of the devs that vote *and* a minimum of 1/3 of all devs. By requiring the support of at least 1/3 of all devs, we can ensure that it won't be possible to have extreme events as getting a policy change approved by > 90% of the voting devs which happen to represent < 10% of all devs. OTOH, requiring 2/3 of the voting devs might prove to be to hard in an election with a high turnout - afaicr we didn't have > 60% turnout in any election in at least the last 2 years. > - Tobias -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / SPARC / KDE