Re: [gentoo-project] Council meeting Sunday 10/June/2018 18:00 UTC

[Aaron Bauman <bman@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4409 bytes --]

On Friday, June 8, 2018 2:02:42 PM EDT Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Freitag, 8. Juni 2018, 19:44:00 CEST schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
> > Dear all,
> > 
> > the Gentoo Council will meet again this sunday, 10 June 2018, 18:00 UTC on
> > the #gentoo-council IRC channel.
> > 
> > Please reply to this e-mail with agenda item proposals.
> 
> I would like to put the following proposal on the agenda once more
> (clarified and expanded):
> 
> The Gentoo council shall directly contact "Software in the Public Interest
> Inc." (SPI), with the intention of Gentoo becoming a SPI Associated Project.
> The intention is for SPI to become an *additional* service provider of the
> Gentoo developer community for Accepting Donations, Holding Funds, and
> Holding Assets. The SPI project liaison shall be appointed by the Gentoo
> council.
> 
> No transfer of funds or assets of any kind between SPI and the Gentoo
> Foundation is stipulated (it would be the trustees' responsibility anyway),
> so any (dys)function of the Gentoo Foundation has no impact on this new
> business relationship. Equally, the business relationship with SPI shall
> have no impact on the current function of the Gentoo Foundation.
> Essentially, the proposal is that we start with an empty account at SPI.
> (I'll be happy to make the first donation.)
> 
> 
> SPI does not require exclusivity; the company explicitly allows that a
> project is also sponsored by further parties. As long as SPI does not
> publicly represent Gentoo, there is no conflict regarding trademarks. Most
> SPI associated projects are unincorporated associations of individuals, as
> is the Gentoo developer community electing the Gentoo Council.
> 
> As additional bonus, we will be gaining that donations to SPI are tax-
> deductible both in the US and in the EU.
> 
> The precise procedure for appointing the project liaison is up to debate; a
> draft proposal can be found below.
> ==
> a) The project liaison is a Gentoo developer appointed by the Gentoo
> council, and bound to follow its instructions.
> b) Appointment of the project liaison is by vote of the majority of council
> members (i.e. >=4 votes). The only way to unseat the project liaison is to
> appoint a different project liaison by vote.
> c) Officers and trustees of the Gentoo Foundation are not eligible for
> project liaison.

Given that this could potentially be viewed an a step forward in negating the 
purpose of the Gentoo Foundation I find it wise the consider the following:

No sitting council members may be appointed to the project liaison
role.  If this individual is under the strict instruction of the council this 
there is no purpose for a dual-hatted individual.  As such, the project 
laision should be capable of disagreement with the council and not fear 
retribution by being unseated.  This position should be highly coveted as it 
will *directly* impact the current and future health of *our* project.

Additionally, the project liaison should be given some avenue of reprisal.  
First thought would be to introduce an all hands developer vote be called to 
unseat that project liaison.

e.g. council appointed, but developer community removed.

Again, this proposal *could* potentially be a step forward in negating the 
Foundation's purpose.  As such, it is important that the dev community be 
aware of what is happening and why.  Disagreements between the council and 
their appointed liaison should not be simply squashed by introducing a new 
liaison who will blindly do things the way the council wants.

While I do not disagree with the SPI proposal I find it best that all proper 
checks and balances be in place.  If SPI can offer stability for our 
intellectual property, donations, finances, etc then it would be the correct 
move.

Ultimately, we *ought* to ensure that it is done the proper way.  Please put 
the proper checks and balances in place.

> d) The restriction of c) can be lifted permanently by Gentoo council
> majority decision only after the council, the Gentoo Foundation trustees,
> and the board of the financial sponsor organization have come into
> agreement that * the financial situation of the Gentoo Foundation has been
> sufficiently clarified,
> * any outstanding taxes have been determined and paid, and
> * any further outstanding relevant business of the Gentoo Foundation, i.e.,
>   with the IRS, has been concluded.
> ==


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]