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 433A0138334 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:47:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D1143E098E; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:47:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lf1-x134.google.com (mail-lf1-x134.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::134]) (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 45926E08F5 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:47:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-x134.google.com with SMTP id t15so1701086lfl.12 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 05:47:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gentoo-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=p7pjLXku7e3We8dsEhmB5zllTgmx9UgQ15Nbs0SgtFw=; b=oudqCT241/SVGx6qyJeFX6O2qq80e6CEIJfHsutF/MTuGkpRXqfiqT/ZZ0+qH004Gw i+ymjjqK9fzFuELJ+3dwOrC9XsK7cu8hlzJ5TCWeCtWZKM2zF4cXiZQtnNA+xbYjakpd H49jqSkMxv7DPesTJw/48/txNIMI2cy4yyC9zxj5ae6X1KQHUvPiSt5lHH9fBvyjxs1E dqCVNwLW4Ay4SRx1gcZK2LlRNWYnZc2mcNMAJJJsqovv9cCDWbrznLMZBp1tuu7YQfpV pYieOKINZQ27AkarTz72bancsGaWgmec9Dq1JIe18EyNnbXFx9+yrRX5KmIcb1uyMeOE H2iA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=p7pjLXku7e3We8dsEhmB5zllTgmx9UgQ15Nbs0SgtFw=; b=Y017eqhFlYkWzOeAExHLmrZ/cCuMOPuP2mjIrU58kj0iZe3WjgpSg32N/XE77HcD6p coDJsfJ20h3RnULkqhffxaWqFcrI+P8rdPGm3ZUd0beVoG9Tu4ThiW8I9pCRgL+w9nXp aGxRI87kdwkIggRvpFc09BECpaGTcmiyWHYiWrOXV20hrH0DXOp/tvCba5ZjRaghS154 6tmYCuliSZuyNLCT1lnol85AQUJ/3ipN0VO7jxkkcUGie83nvLbjlOPwOvhMeqRU+W6u GtUmiWTGQ/zko/C5MCtCZoJNUzc9rJg38utf7zuWw7mmKwaxcChDoy+IXY/HTa0ypEpc 5PaQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWz1WWljrgESW9RUxVJUBJl4bMFxwWNw+x/AS3G0IPEfJt7sZQa geIv0p9h6XO9lUXVGS5M7UogQSPuPbFYAwp0UEyGRI/NBCjUXw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxUxwi0bpA0ZHrTQz8VZS4bNhoXZVx5iyhWKrFvjKlVZaRc1U3uV9v4J0A2S2A0KGByaxgOPH1JGCJcqVBeP6A= X-Received: by 2002:a19:ed03:: with SMTP id y3mr22429147lfy.30.1554900451940; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 05:47:31 -0700 (PDT) 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4bbfc34f-335f-5521-310a-b66ffd0d9a9a@gentoo.org> <5e30d658-80c8-b608-1505-dc08db3625bf@gentoo.org> <20190403174315.32615d3b9574571e3ed4a399@gentoo.org> <80ed2e482e96c96555bf4fd9331731c4c9ad0d7f.camel@gentoo.org> <232747ba-063c-821f-a66d-5f106ed2aa82@gentoo.org> <20190410062712.jvgec4vhpvvo2e6v@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: From: Alec Warner Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:47:20 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] call for agenda items -- council meeting 2019-04-14 To: gentoo-project Cc: Ulrich Mueller , Gokturk Yuksek Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000196f4e05862c79bb" X-Archives-Salt: ea9a261b-5254-4547-8714-c756e6389701 X-Archives-Hash: 3dac6ab6657ad307938923acf709d325 --000000000000196f4e05862c79bb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:28 AM Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny = wrote: > On Wed, 2019-04-10 at 15:27 +0900, Alice Ferrazzi wrote: > > The 04/10/2019 07:59, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, 10 Apr 2019, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 09 Apr 2019, Gokturk Yuksek wrote: > > > > I'd like to (informally) propose the following, for which I'm willi= ng > > > > to formulate as a GLEP proposal if there is interest: > > > > The Foundation has an established practice of storing the legal nam= es > > > > of developers who join under a pseudonym. The infrastructure is > > > > already in place for this. I think that allowing these developers t= o > > > > commit using their pseudonyms as long as the Foundation is informed > > > > their real identity does not exacerbate the legal risks they alread= y > > > > pose. The foundation may decide their arbitrary criteria on who is > > > > eligible for this type of protection, including requiring sound leg= al > > > > reasons for them to keep their identities hidden. I understand that > > > > the maintenance of this could be a burden for the Foundation in > > > > theory, but in practice I suspect this number is very low already. > > > > > > That doesn't work, because there would be no way for a person outside > of > > > the Foundation to verify such identities. > > > > > There is no way also for foundation to check all sign-off are assigned > > to real legal names. > > > > > To clarify, I won't be opposed against making a specific exception an= d > > > "grandfathering" any devs who had commit access before the cut-off da= te > > > when GLEP 76 was implemented. > > > > > > > I propose foundation to vote for add the use of pseudonym in the GLEP 7= 6. > > For keeping Gentoo a confortable and inclusive place. > > > > If Foundation decides to arbitrarily change a policy that's been > initially approved both by Council and Foundation, then I propose that > the Council rejects changes to the policy and blocks such contributions. > > Furthermore, I will propose that we actively pursue removing Foundation > from Gentoo as apparently Trustees once again are trying to abuse > the power that they've only gotten because nobody else wanted to take > legal risk from negligence of previous Boards. > I want to separate talking about things (which is happening on this thread) and actually making and passing foundation motions (which doesn't happen on this list, but does happen on bugzilla.) Alice is in fact a board member (as am I!) and should be free to talk about whatever she likes here. Talking about something is different than "the trustees apparently once again abusing their power." Talking about a concept, even a controversial one, is not an abuse of power; its a free exchange of ideas. -A > -- > Best regards, > Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny > > --000000000000196f4e05862c79bb Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:28 AM Micha=C5= =82 G=C3=B3rny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
On Wed, 2019-04-10 at 15:27 +0900, Alice Ferrazzi = wrote:
> The 04/10/2019 07:59, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, 10 Apr 2019, Ulrich Mueller wrot= e:
> > > > > > > On Tue, 09 Apr 2019, Gokturk Yuksek wrot= e:
> > > I'd like to (informally) propose the following, for whic= h I'm willing
> > > to formulate as a GLEP proposal if there is interest:
> > > The Foundation has an established practice of storing the le= gal names
> > > of developers who join under a pseudonym. The infrastructure= is
> > > already in place for this. I think that allowing these devel= opers to
> > > commit using their pseudonyms as long as the Foundation is i= nformed
> > > their real identity does not exacerbate the legal risks they= already
> > > pose. The foundation may decide their arbitrary criteria on = who is
> > > eligible for this type of protection, including requiring so= und legal
> > > reasons for them to keep their identities hidden. I understa= nd that
> > > the maintenance of this could be a burden for the Foundation= in
> > > theory, but in practice I suspect this number is very low al= ready.
> >
> > That doesn't work, because there would be no way for a person= outside of
> > the Foundation to verify such identities.
> >
> There is no way also for foundation to check all sign-off are assigned=
> to real legal names.
>
> > To clarify, I won't be opposed against making a specific exce= ption and
> > "grandfathering" any devs who had commit access before = the cut-off date
> > when GLEP 76 was implemented.
> >
>
> I propose foundation to vote for add the use of pseudonym in the GLEP = 76.
> For keeping Gentoo a confortable and inclusive place.
>

If Foundation decides to arbitrarily change a policy that's been
initially approved both by Council and Foundation, then I propose that
the Council rejects changes to the policy and blocks such contributions.
Furthermore, I will propose that we actively pursue removing Foundation
from Gentoo as apparently Trustees once again are trying to abuse
the power that they've only gotten because nobody else wanted to take legal risk from negligence of previous Boards.
--000000000000196f4e05862c79bb--