public inbox for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@gentoo.org>
To: Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org>
Cc: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org,
	"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Merging Trustees and Council / Developers and Foundation - 1.0 reply
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 19:04:05 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170111190405.6dbc4d31.mgorny@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAr7Pr_UJdrj5fWLXdof2h_==FMBLnq_2XQzcdr7+HcKzKKiEw@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2091 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 09:04:29 -0800
Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 10:56:16 -0500
> > "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> >  
> > > On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 3:46:34 PM EST Michał Górny wrote:  
> > > >
> > > > 1. I do not mind encouraging more developers to join the Foundation, or
> > > > even making it opt-out. However, I do oppose discriminating developers
> > > > who decide not to join the Foundation.  
> > >
> > > There should not be any discrimination. Just an understanding by opting  
> > out  
> > > you give up your voice/vote.  
> >
> > And how is that not discriminating? On one hand you talk of giving
> > people outside the project the means to influence it, yet you
> > explicitly take away the right of voting for people outside
> > the Foundation (even though they are in the project, after all).
> >  
> 
> To put it another way:
> 
> 1) One goal is to have more foundation members who are also developers
> (alignment of ideas).
> 2) If joining the foundation offers no benefit, then developers will not
> join.
> 3) One benefit we could offer is to merge the voting pools, so that the
> voters for Trustees and the Council are the same.
> 4) This means that anyone who "really cares about how Gentoo is run as a
> distribution" is nominally forced to join the Foundation to exercise their
> vote.
> 
> This is a specific implementation of the basic idea that "the foundation
> has no interesting duties, so we need to give it interesting duties." I
> suspect there are other ways of making Foundation membership useful enough
> that people actually pursue it.
> 
> (Reading it written out it does look like a fairly draconian approach.)

Exactly my point. So why do we want to pursue that? Wouldn't it better
to make it really optional, and turn Foundation membership into a thing
developers would be proud of?

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 963 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-11 18:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-10 22:37 [gentoo-project] Merging Trustees and Council / Developers and Foundation - 1.0 reply Matthew Thode
2017-01-10 23:03 ` Rich Freeman
2017-01-10 23:34 ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11  7:54   ` Ulrich Mueller
2017-01-11  7:50 ` Ulrich Mueller
2017-01-11 10:03   ` Matthew Thode
2017-01-11 10:19     ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-01-11 10:59   ` Matthew Thode
2017-01-11 12:24     ` Matthias Maier
2017-01-11 12:59       ` Raymond Jennings
2017-01-11 14:07       ` Rich Freeman
2017-01-11 15:23         ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11 15:49           ` Raymond Jennings
2017-01-11 15:18       ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11 16:50         ` Matthias Maier
2017-01-11 16:54           ` Ciaran McCreesh
2017-01-11 17:16             ` Matthias Maier
2017-01-11 17:42             ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11 16:56           ` Alec Warner
2017-01-11 17:06             ` Matthias Maier
2017-01-11 17:20               ` Alec Warner
2017-01-11 19:16                 ` Matthias Maier
2017-01-11 17:39               ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-12  5:53                 ` Daniel Campbell
2017-01-11 17:55             ` Michał Górny
2017-01-11 17:01           ` Matthias Maier
2017-01-11 17:41             ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-12  0:03               ` Matthias Maier
2017-01-11 17:33           ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-25 20:32       ` Matthew Thode
2017-01-25 20:40         ` Rich Freeman
2017-01-25 20:51           ` Matthew Thode
2017-01-26 16:02           ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11 15:06     ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11 15:11     ` Michał Górny
2017-01-11 15:29       ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11 15:56         ` Raymond Jennings
2017-01-11 14:46 ` Michał Górny
2017-01-11 15:56   ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11 16:50     ` Michał Górny
2017-01-11 17:04       ` Alec Warner
2017-01-11 18:04         ` Michał Górny [this message]
2017-01-11 17:28       ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11 18:55         ` Michał Górny
2017-01-11 19:17           ` Raymond Jennings
2017-01-11 21:13           ` William L. Thomson Jr.
2017-01-11 16:06   ` Matthew Thode
2017-01-11 16:58     ` Michał Górny
2017-01-15 15:55       ` Roy Bamford

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170111190405.6dbc4d31.mgorny@gentoo.org \
    --to=mgorny@gentoo.org \
    --cc=antarus@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org \
    --cc=wlt-ml@o-sinc.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox