From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LQ3VU-0002NG-GL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:38:21 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A33CFE076C; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:38:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73CF9E076D for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:38:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (xray.science.oregonstate.edu [128.193.220.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E872A64746 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:38:15 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 09:38:15 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for January 22 Message-ID: <20090122173815.GD20446@comet> References: <20090121233526.GA15870@comet> <20090122000229.GF15870@comet> <1232644991.4164.19.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.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="g7w8+K/95kPelPD2" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1232644991.4164.19.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Archives-Salt: 1937fe11-3e76-45f0-8e68-0f7d51d800f7 X-Archives-Hash: 57dbe266da79cd939dc7c223fa241040 --g7w8+K/95kPelPD2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 18:23 Thu 22 Jan , Tobias Scherbaum wrote: > Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > Discuss on-list before meeting > > --------------------------------------- > > - Council meta stuff (-council) > > - Can the size change? Minimum? Maximum? > > - Should we have 2-year staggered terms? >=20 > I'm in favor of a fixed size of council members, I'd like to see at > least 5 council members *if* developers want to change the size. I > dislike the idea of stretched 2-year terms, instead I prefer having > 1-year staggered terms (voting every 6 months and replace 3 or 4 council > members). This would allow to put open council slots into the next > election, we wouldn't need to hold extra elections for open slots then. >=20 > Anyways, this is something we can discuss - but as a change to the > voting procedure most likely does change or extend what's written down > in GLEP 39 I'd like to see a election on those changes. I replied to -council to keep this discussion off -dev. --=20 Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com --g7w8+K/95kPelPD2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkl4rwcACgkQXVaO67S1rtsYfwCgz2iC7EFJ+xLMjeAMQm2hOtC5 1YsAn1xYvc1sFEgb5jD0XTJww9CPC4Gc =XBIZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --g7w8+K/95kPelPD2--