From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C0CA1396D9 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:15:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 64E31E0F26; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:15:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf0-x230.google.com (mail-pf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00E19E0EC1 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:15:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id x7so17924235pfa.1 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:15:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=CYeM3PM77Fz4KHCbNlDqCd867iACdZqXhddq6VU3TYQ=; b=SJ5qy04JbLUdFzwr4ReWW+Ij/HojUJ87NZIvR7cTFlIhGjxoHQeBRO36hnrXW4qG7D 2L1XQPIDwjLY/Ox74QiE0rtadoNtpbtI7ce6/TDA1sWtjVpk55TYF8UtVFQF49wqO41N 28uPslVuoR0WkBFdXcKA9UVHoOJT8tZFucJEZ/ntdweKSrNkzm17zihqtrc8covfFZer bz7r/ShZWYf/85l1IO+lxSvXn4iPkOnjfTaFvySOD+wIAAZ/gCRWopNClVZWvC9gNRxr cvaOtETDBkS2S7uNi1K/+a/9xxJm+r0phJg+PcPlW9WzPUFjZAI/sQpRLWBwZVyzKBBj vFeg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to; bh=CYeM3PM77Fz4KHCbNlDqCd867iACdZqXhddq6VU3TYQ=; b=KDmpsdK9zMQOrcahMghQB8F65mSECD0jHpWYSv9aEvkUJq0b0I1H1rYEbLDlXrD7/W 4fwqOs0cY7p5s2IAhOu5oh9yknOFiNlt/MEGvgQCSxvJHw6vsY+KLONVMkGWDk0YbyNM bfaKQmTmnxqoWHImmBpF7jmCP9JBSHuHMBHgZj7+q/LCXIBa7LkSHcMBxuW4oZf8DmuD GM6LegNC7e8FNQLORYimJfjlAlqg7pcxWq0MDPfiBoWdoXuJdnyFp+6LViNn2h1NavHu DI1L0YnuuaUIrnfEm4htUAVHW9kaXue0AQEVLPVDPdn958DUwUAtL5xI7YyotpM3k7SY bcLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5Txd0wGwL4mQF8SixyjpzSjk1H+FchaZr0daG35SQVoFDVkr0D ANhDNecUd90v+OThfBrAnyd4pzbZus1FNQizDApwwu7h X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYUkpqP2z13jXealIg7coj74qWLz52orhbLMmCnkAttj1W0xGQ4ow/6JxaAuk9VOV568FEjCgqPgpqtK6lkGno= X-Received: by 10.101.76.71 with SMTP id l7mr17103436pgr.242.1510780518547; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:15:18 -0800 (PST) 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 Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.100.142.1 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:15:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1510763324.1312.5.camel@gentoo.org> <75d4c538-3043-d98b-af6e-174552f2ff29@gentoo.org> From: Rich Freeman Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 16:15:18 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: wv9i5d9GVo5jWrEUuvPtMN7Uuxc Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] manifest-hashes changing to 'BLAKE2B SHA512' on 2017-11-21 To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 951814e1-3fc0-4988-860e-b87719dd3ec3 X-Archives-Hash: 34489ae332a2824c3f8db3cd9165747a On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 3:21 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > The council has no power > over Trustees, and Trustees do have legal power over all of Gentoo. Sure, just keep in mind that legally Gentoo is basically nothing but a name and a logo. The Trustees could ask the community to stop using the name and logo, but in practice that would be about all they could do, in a hypothetical world where the Trustees and the Community were in some kind of conflict (which is unlikely in practice). The actual distro is largely community-run. Gentoo isn't like Redhat. It isn't a legal entity that happens to have a community. It is more of a community that happens to have a legal entity. Since the Foundation doesn't actually have any employees it is actually fairly limited in its ability to make things happen in the real world. With its funding it is actually fairly limited in making things happen legally as well. Its main function at this time (IMO) is to protect the name so that somebody else who has more money doesn't tell us to stop using it, and to pay for moderate expenses. > Which is some what strange as Trustees can be responsible for the actions of others. Despite having no say in such matters till it becomes a legal issue. As long as the Trustees aren't violating any laws or blatantly ignoring their violation I doubt they'd have much personal liability to outsiders. The Foundation has more liability, but really the main risk there is losing whatever donations are sitting around unspent and maybe having somebody tell us we can't call ourselves Gentoo. The practical independence of the community from the Foundation works both ways. Having to change our name would be inconvenient, but it is still an unlikely outcome as we do try to be reasonably careful. -- Rich