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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-41352-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>) id 1OPJpU-0002Pg-T8 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:28:45 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1FEC5E0BAC; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:28:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost01.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost01.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.3.140]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 458BBE0B99 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:28:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [62.3.120.141] (helo=NeddySeagoon) by smarthost01.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org>) id 1OPJpD-0004ys-Gd for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:28:27 +0000 Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:28:26 +0100 From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <4C196595.20600@gentoo.org> (from sping@gentoo.org on Thu Jun 17 01:00:21 2010) X-Mailer: Balsa 2.4.7 Message-Id: <1276799306.2335.0@NeddySeagoon> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-Smarthost01-IP: [62.3.120.141] X-Archives-Salt: 63604cd1-c12b-427e-bf91-dc0072cbb2d9 X-Archives-Hash: b2c8c051f6fdedb714a1c7179519c94f On 2010.06.17 01:00, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > Hello! [snip] >=20 > Problem: Both betelgeuse and jmbsvicetto are DevRel members > nominated for the upcoming council election. > As I am also nominated proposing such rule could be > understood aiming at decreasing their chances on the > council and increasing mine as a result. However, as=20 > I > propose to start over with a developer voted conflict > resolution team this is not the case. The only > implication is that if they make it to the council > they cannot be elected for the conflict resolution > team. >=20 >=20 > DevRel is one of the most important things in Gentoo - we dependend=20 > on > that working well. If you care about this please make yourself=20 > heard. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 >=20 >=20 > Sebastian >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 Sebastian, You are suggesting that devrel/council members don't know of the=20 conflict of interests beforehand and/or that they fail to disqualify=20 themselves from an active part in either the devrel or council part of=20 the proceedings. I admit that the possibility exists under present=20 rules. Enforced division of responsibility can be a good thing in places but=20 I'm not convinced that this is one of those places. That said, I would=20 not want devrel to become a subset of council, nor council to become a=20 subset of devrel. Its just for that reason that the Foundation bylaws=20 forbid any individual serving as a trustee and on council at the same=20 time. Maybe I am coming round to supporting your view after all. --=20 Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees