From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EdTBL-0004qH-EZ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:55:07 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAJDsPar030157; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:54:25 GMT Received: from jaguar.lieber.org (jaguar.lieber.org [217.160.252.168]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAJDqemA013185 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:52:41 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jaguar.lieber.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09E6F29C1F3 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:57:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jaguar.lieber.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (jaguar.lieber.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18472-17 for ; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:57:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by jaguar.lieber.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id C9A8329C101; Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:57:07 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:57:07 +0000 From: Kurt Lieber To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-dev] Council Responsibilities (was: Email subdomain) Message-ID: <20051119135707.GP12982@mail.lieber.org> References: <1132333748.8524.9.camel@localhost> <20051119003803.GD12958@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <1044169158.20051119031533@gentoo.org> <200511191334.10158.cshields@gentoo.org> <437EF0EB.3030109@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1ou9v+QBCNysIXaH" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <437EF0EB.3030109@gentoo.org> X-GPG-Key: http://www.lieber.org/kurtl.pub.gpg User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lieber.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-3.3, AWL=0.006, BAYES_00=-2.599] X-Spam-Score: -5.893 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: e0665d26-e042-4a35-9c77-9e91f55d4390 X-Archives-Hash: 4024540883f3d9b5a78e7a90398fbaf8 --1ou9v+QBCNysIXaH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 10:31:23AM +0100 or thereabouts, Thierry Carrez wro= te: > What I find disturbing here is that nobody found the issue interesting > enough to read the October Council decisions as to what was needed to be > changed for the GLEP to be approved.=20 I think there's some validity to this point, but I actually hold the members of the council at least partially repsonsible for the lack of communication. The council is not only responsible for making decisions when consensus cannot be reached. They're also responsible for proactive communication. I don't think it's reasonable to expect all devs to read through full IRC transcripts, sift out the nonsense, distill it down to its salient points and then decide how it fits with their own particular views on Gentoo.=20 The council needs to take a more active role in posting meeting minutes and proactively communicating with the dev community, rather than expecting everyone to come to them to figure out what's going on. > You can't just ignore the discussion and the iterim decisions and > complain afterwards when the decision is taken. You can't reasonably expect all Gentoo devs to read through unfiltered IRC logs to figure out what discussion went on. And, just for the record, s/Gentoo Council/Gentoo Trustees/ and I feel the exact same way -- we, as trustees, need to do a better job about communicating as well. --kurt --1ou9v+QBCNysIXaH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDfy8zJPpRNiftIEYRAnTyAJkB3sJ91+eqCs9P7qc1+w5em4ys4wCfQWHy Pcqeenz1pXwEf+8jjwN2TyQ= =UmI3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1ou9v+QBCNysIXaH-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list