From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QsZg0-0007MS-7r for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 14 Aug 2011 12:20:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C73BEE05A1; Sun, 14 Aug 2011 12:20:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE7B2E057F for ; Sun, 14 Aug 2011 12:20:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.22] (p548DB934.dip.t-dialin.net [84.141.185.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tommy) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 738831B403A for ; Sun, 14 Aug 2011 12:20:02 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4E47BD6E.3080500@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2011 14:19:58 +0200 From: Thomas Sachau User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110805 Firefox/5.0 SeaMonkey/2.2 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 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Should DevRel members be in Council? References: <4E47ADA0.2060906@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4E47ADA0.2060906@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.1 OpenPGP: id=211CA2D4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig1A17055B1DEB79A2523EB749" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: a24e102f45704ecbcd254c25698fa461 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig1A17055B1DEB79A2523EB749 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Markos Chandras schrieb: > Hi, >=20 > This is the second item I would like to discuss for the next Council > agenda ( or a later one ) >=20 > Quite a few of you know that Council acts as a court in case a develope= r > has unresolved disputes with Devrel or when he is not happy with a > Devrel's decision. The problem is that having the same people in the > Council and in Devrel makes no sense since the same people will vote > twice on that matter. A developer who wants to appeal to Council, seeks= > a review of his case and a fresh voting from new people. However, havin= g > devrel members, which are already biased based on the previous decision= , > makes the "Council's court role" a moot role :) I have to ask the same here as for the other proposal: Why do you restrict your proposal to a specific project? The issue you ar= e pointing at is the same for any other project, where someone does open an appeal to council to vo= te on a team decision he does not want to accept. --------------enig1A17055B1DEB79A2523EB749 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iJwEAQECAAYFAk5HvW4ACgkQG7kqcTWJkGeX5gP+KLUjCCxcJtCIAUfHghA/pShL 1/+upyDp9yo8KLccAqle+fYtQuAqc4tEYgSMBH1iQ3Hs+j55CQai0ojx2XUI0Pvi 3L5H/oAe5Z/XT0mRV+TUawbaKu0ISuMk7KxeSdatrrGQkboOsCaA+zJu8mIGz79X eCSxVxsQR3NRDrCH2n8= =c315 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig1A17055B1DEB79A2523EB749--