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 330CE138334 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 09:27:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A153DE083B; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 09:27:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (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 53385E0805 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 09:27:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de (host2092.kph.uni-mainz.de [134.93.134.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ulm) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1EFCB335C2E; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 09:27:46 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <23348.43534.971234.375071@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 11:27:42 +0200 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council nominee 2018/19 questions In-Reply-To: <1530087907.849.13.camel@gentoo.org> References: <1529997071.2250.6.camel@gentoo.org> <1530087907.849.13.camel@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) From: Ulrich Mueller Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="pgp+signed+mlwgnyd3YQGUbp5"; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: f06c4703-20e4-4caa-bb36-3552712defc6 X-Archives-Hash: 90efa2e54b04198064c405302f89da12 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --pgp+signed+mlwgnyd3YQGUbp5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2018, Micha=B3 G=F3rny wrote: > Three more questions from me: > 1. Do you believe that Council members should respect the requests > of the developer community even if they disagree with them=3F > Or should Council members decide based on their own judgment of > arguments presented=3F > Example: there's a heated debate, and the majority of respondents > request that X is implemented. However, after reading all the > arguments you don't think that X is a good idea but you haven't > managed to convince others. Would you vote for X (as your > electorate demands) or against it (as you believe is better for > the distro)=3F Things are usually not as clear cut as in your constructed example. If there is consensus in a discussion (which doesn't exclude that there could be single dissenting voices) then generally the council should go with that. However, if there's consensus then normally there's no reason for the council to get involved. OTOH, if there is disagreement then the council may be asked to resolve the issue. That's the reason why the council exists in the first place, namely to have a procedure for deciding global issues, without the need to have an all-devs vote for everything. In short, I would not vote against developer consensus, but in case of an unresolved controversy my vote would be based on my judgement what will be best for the distro. > 2. Do you believe that the Council should proactively research the > state of affairs and make decisions whenever they believe the > direction of the distribution needs to be adjusted=3F Or should it > be passive and avoid involvement unless developers explicitly > request Council's intervention=3F How would you even measure "proactivity", and how would you distinguish between "the Council" and its members acting as individuals=3F If I look at the number of agenda items for the past term (excluding unfinished business and open bugs), then about 75% of the items were submitted by council members, 20% by other developers, and 5% by users. Then again, are council members simply submitting so much because they at the same time are very active devs, or in their capacity as council members=3F > 3. Do you believe the developer community should hold the power > to veto or dissolve the Council at any point=3F Provided there's > a global developer vote agreeing on that. Presumably, I would not oppose a voting system similar to Debian's "general resolution" (as suggested in [1]), if it has reasonably high thresholds (because dissolving the Council every other month won't help us either). OTOH, I am a friend of the KISS principle [2], and we should be very careful not to unnecessarily complicate our processes by adding too many layers. Ulrich [1] https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20180408-summary.t= xt [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS=5Fprinciple --pgp+signed+mlwgnyd3YQGUbp5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJbNKnwAAoJEMMJBoUcYcJz1w8H/ivfnJlIuEnaU0SK3lybPA/f H91ycR/nuSbfEaK2p+bhFJuuI+3Yfa3wd8BSDipbTD5HpleQI/orGJEnOdWVMAtc tX7EdH3geS236OQ6Ccw4a25VrCKA3PlH1IEuQ0TW6hu+UfvJObIJ10W+oCN+2/Uz 4LL8RJS/2tF+m70H15szs5PXsYazTbcuCaIjHocYuz1oexnj0s33YaIxOyF6PKPI FOMa4fHg+yCIwVlNaMVhvzqqCOGLY24kkwrD/EoDJe4JT+6+NvmMOu2vTSj/MnIc difvTotAnLCRSTYtcnhsCgwteFhUKz4l72sjNNkBMnZ1fxCI9bj2EAFUsZdBPfY= =LuWK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pgp+signed+mlwgnyd3YQGUbp5--