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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GGE8I-0004wo-GU for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:16:26 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k7OCFbcp015452; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:15:37 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k7OCDKiw018700 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:13:20 GMT Received: from iglu.bnet.local (d039230.adsl.hansenet.de [80.171.39.230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DDE4642AE for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:13:19 +0000 (UTC) From: Carsten Lohrke To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Democracy: No silver bullet Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:13:09 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4 References: <44ECF00D.7050107@gentoo.org> <20060824065019.GA13655@superlupo.rechner> <44ED5B2F.8010605@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <44ED5B2F.8010605@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; boundary="nextPart2087924.piWkMPhGRH"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200608241413.15891.carlo@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 65913691-fe98-40f5-8532-5e13175be9c1 X-Archives-Hash: 11cddbdd831bc6af6e0be7f333b98180 --nextPart2087924.piWkMPhGRH Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday 24 August 2006 09:54, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > The council doesn't actually do anything AFAICT, it just "approves" GLEP > decisions that have already been made. So in effect we have no leadership. Well, to quote the council project page: "The elected Gentoo Council decides on global issues and policies that affe= ct=20 multiple projects in Gentoo." and from GLEP 19 "Global issues will be decided by an elected Gentoo council." So yes, the council is not elected to rule into decisions of single Gentoo= =20 project decisions, unless it affects Gentoo globally. What "global issues"= =20 are can be argued about, though. Personally I see the council as our body t= o=20 make decisions and wouldn't disagree to reword the base on which the counci= l=20 acts to give them explicitly the power to decide on whatever they feel they= =20 have to, if necessary - except being bound to have to be re-elected. I'm not as long on board as you Donnie, but I don't think you're right with= =20 your implicit call that we need a benevolant dictator. There's simply no=20 evidence, that this model would have done better with Gentoo's growth. I ha= ve=20 at least one big point I could list, what went wrong, while Daniel Robbins= =20 was the lead. Ask me privately, if you're interested what I mean. I don't=20 want to let others look bad or be the source of flaming. Carsten --nextPart2087924.piWkMPhGRH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBE7ZfbVwbzmvGLSW8RAtYaAKCpHLDctI7LRqJ9R/hkiIiMfLsrMgCggtiC asNKcRUhe2JHr3dGe1VxSFw= =Us4X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2087924.piWkMPhGRH-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list