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 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HZEte-0002Pz-FA for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 23:28:10 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l34NR2Mr011851; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 23:27:02 GMT Received: from anubis.medic.chalmers.se (anubis.medic.chalmers.se [129.16.30.218]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l34NP9Do009641 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2007 23:25:10 GMT Received: from localhost (atubo.ekb.sgsnet.se [193.11.215.65]) (Authenticated sender: buisse) by mail.chalmers.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id A85EC8C9C for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2007 01:25:09 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 01:28:44 +0200 From: Alexandre Buisse To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for April Message-ID: <20070404232844.GB7174@ubik> References: <20070401092940.1B4C26441E@smtp.gentoo.org> <20070404193643.GA7174@ubik> <20070404201717.GB25883@feynman.corp.halliburton.com> 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="mxv5cy4qt+RJ9ypb" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070404201717.GB25883@feynman.corp.halliburton.com> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.20-gentoo-r3-ubik i686 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Archives-Salt: f3a1e08b-6ce3-4af5-827d-7751b5cfad72 X-Archives-Hash: d1c47c9a6162ff42cfd2d43c928c4d30 --mxv5cy4qt+RJ9ypb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Apr 4, 2007 at 22:27:45 +0200, Grant Goodyear wrote: > Alexandre Buisse wrote: [Wed Apr 04 2007, 02:36:43PM CDT] > > I won't take this to the council myself, but I think this should be > > discussed at the very least: we need a way to limit the council power, > > since it seems there is nothing to this effect in the metastructure > > glep.=20 >=20 > For what it's worth, I deliberately wrote the GLEP that way. The > truth of the matter is that the Council has only whatever power the > devs permit, so adding additional restrictions seems like a really bad > idea to me. This is true as long as you don't have written rules on who is the boss of what. Since the metastructure explicitly says "council is the boss of everyone", I don't see why there shouldn't be an explicit "but if council messes up, we can appeal and/or fire them". Most power systems, if not all, do have this one way or another. Unlimited power is no good. =20 > > I think that when members of the council, who have total control > > on gentoo, say things like "I don't feel we should listen to what the > > dev community thinks", then one should begin to worry. >=20 > Someone actually said that? Yes, on #gentoo-council iirc. I don't have logs at the moment so I can't give you the reference, but it was during the CoC "discussion". =20 > In any event, Gentoo is a community project. If you can convince > enough of the community that you're right, and the Council is wrong, > then the Council is extremely likely to listen. If they don't, vote > out the bums. Well, the thing is, vote happens only once a year, and quite a lot of things can be done during that time. I just think that not having any rule at all concerning limitations to the council is tying our hands in our back. If the council never messes up, then this rule won't ever be used, and if they do, we'll be happy to have this handy rather than having to argue for ages and being told "you elected us, so shut up and if you don't agree, don't vote for us next time" (which is an answer I actually got several times). Now, this is all I have to say on the topic. I resigned from gentoo and, to be perfectly honest, I don't really care one way or another since I'm not involved anymore, but I felt that this should at least be said, since it's in my opinion a major flaw of the current metastructure. Regards, /Alexandre --=20 Hi, I'm a .signature virus! Please copy me in your ~/.signature. --mxv5cy4qt+RJ9ypb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGFDSswx9vvAARv2sRAk/FAJ0TPKnJ1wY2sfLVKdJyBZaRVV6kMwCfasM7 gAWzHaT12klXdxQgU4QbXYc= =MAU1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mxv5cy4qt+RJ9ypb-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list