On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 11:42:01PM -0400, Virgil Dupras wrote: > On Sun, 8 Apr 2018 20:29:27 -0700 > zlg wrote: > > > Why should a group -- who holds no legal, social, or practical > > responsibility -- be trusted to lead the efforts of an organization? > > Since Gentoo's CoC is strongly based on Debian, maybe we could look at Debian's constitution for clues on this and ask ourselves why it says in section 9 [1]: > > > An organisation holding assets for Debian has no authority regarding > > Debian's technical or nontechnical decisions, except that no decision > > by Debian with respect to any property held by the organisation shall > > require it to act outside its legal authority. > > Maybe that this type of separation of concerns worked well for them? Maybe it can work well for Gentoo? > > Regards, > Virgil Dupras > > [1] https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution#item-9 > Separating concerns may work, but not without a real, legally binding contract that both parties consent to and abide by. Otherwise, the Foundation takes on all the legal and financial risk and gets nothing for it. An affirmation from the two parties is not a binding contract. I would support one if it was equitable and enforceable, i.e. not GLEP 39. If the relationship is reduced to business, then the Council should offer something in return.