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 4.43) id 1EFA2M-00069c-F7 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 12:37:22 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8DCWA6o005520; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 12:32:10 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8DCTUke031631 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 12:29:31 GMT Received: from ip68-102-201-166.ks.ok.cox.net ([68.102.201.166] helo=[10.3.1.3]) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EF9z9-0007aP-NO for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 12:34:03 +0000 Message-ID: <4326C737.1020704@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 07:33:59 -0500 From: Lance Albertson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050731) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council meeting, Thursday 15th, 1900 UTC References: <4325D12A.5050601@gentoo.org> <1126560585.7339.5.camel@localhost> <20050912220029.GX9414@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> <200509122159.32575.vapier@gentoo.org> <43265B48.6050506@ieee.org> <4326A271.1020903@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4326A271.1020903@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.92.0.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig5EBBA434536455EFACAD8CC4" X-Archives-Salt: 72e82ded-57cf-4c0e-b195-6140eae73be7 X-Archives-Hash: 167802f053b9e558438335c5d27f3fce This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig5EBBA434536455EFACAD8CC4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thierry Carrez wrote: > Nathan L. Adams wrote: > >>Mike Frysinger wrote: >> >> >>>>right ... once a GLEP has been hammered out and approved, there isnt really >>>>anything left for managers/council to do ... it's then up to whoever to get >>>>it done ;) >> >>They *could* do some 'creative re-org' a.k.a. remove some folks from >>their current roles if they are willfully breaking the rules... > > > This is the role of devrel enforcement arm. The complaint / > investigation / judgement / appeal process is already defined. The > council enters the stage only at the appeals step to limit abuse of > power situations (and of course to define what policy really is). > > I for one am committed to help in enforcement of any policy that has > been decided, but only in the limits of what we were elected for (we > won't replace project leads or devrel). The actual powers/role of devrel has always been a grey area. Perhaps it is time that the Council formalize their position so people know exactly what they can/can't do. -- Lance Albertson Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager --- GPG Public Key: Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742 ramereth/irc.freenode.net --------------enig5EBBA434536455EFACAD8CC4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDJsc7QW+hXSf0t0IRAv/pAJ4znNlUzqQEhbUNEQYeQHXgVbWHrACdFyFr 25e8YSV5Wvk6GMA12wJDz38= =L1X5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig5EBBA434536455EFACAD8CC4-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list