Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-08-12

[hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>]

Rich Freeman:
> 
> Some options open to the council are:
> 1.  Let the games project keep its policy, and anybody who wants to
> change this has to join the project and call for elections (the
> council can shoe-horn members onto the project if necessary).

You want to force-push members into a team while "preserving" the old
structure? That calls for trouble.

> 2.  Directly tweak games policy but preserve the project and its
> scope.  So, games would still have to adhere to games project policy,
> but the Council might change specific policies (use of eclass, group,
> etc).

That's contradictory, IMO. You are practically telling the games team
"your policies suck, so we just changed them". That doesn't really mean
they preserve their scope.

> 3.  Restrict the games project scope, such as giving it authority if
> the package maintainer elects to put it in the games herd.

This calls for trouble as well and will cause massive inconsistency.

> 4.  Do nothing.
> 

Pretty common these days, but what about

5. Have undertakers check for slacking project leads and accept related
complaints. If a project has a slacking lead, then the project should be
given a (long) deadline to fix it. If they don't fix it, then they
should be disbanded. A project cannot function properly without an
active lead (unless the project structure defines that there is no lead
anyway).