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 9818A138334 for ; Sun, 17 Jun 2018 02:29:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 66038E0875; Sun, 17 Jun 2018 02:29:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pl0-f42.google.com (mail-pl0-f42.google.com [209.85.160.42]) (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 18E49E086C for ; Sun, 17 Jun 2018 02:29:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pl0-f42.google.com with SMTP id c41-v6so7234712plj.10 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2018 19:29:52 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=JxekiUEBl5MW06HQG8iGzLzTtbEYGU6rznIlwOHXOEY=; b=HS15hQLQqgl0uQJfTgYr5QlMchdUroO+qHOwceRFg/C2moCFYDGHxTh5sNOqFn9sFi pcxBvHy7mpiy6+qjC8TE/OylclLLEmT+wzc3BbstwOyYNmmKVu2zHwgncIyIq/9y89i1 O0NYZKSOjHQ7FEcPTAmQ9Vc31vLH29gAYLIPUEYw2YFrGmXsCvxcPbP6XSBBmqALRhQY eFN00dbbXP/TFTtASwWNIyZKvv2ym4y+SrHFqH4aXQcqIGHaegzlLKzlXJHzFW8HOuMz YhAYVXZfaKnWbzluC2DNOH6Y5cUxLOUACMj8KHwc1K0PMbChsd0tVqkAtMkucp8Lc3VA dIIg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E34HlECGURRuUJdmIwQTbkGEA8KSm5FgryTMqEwvI3Q1Ux8o877 uEHE4KMzCvlSi0C4xbp72xRyOFsmpcawJv7wxQajFA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIn206TEqGkPIZJ1l2FB8lBNf98fi6bTmZOHee1n7TKy4pLRWRXrb+GmAOBigISWmN90etue2LN/jZ2sDj5mfk= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:bd8f:: with SMTP id q15-v6mr8607329pls.161.1529202591633; Sat, 16 Jun 2018 19:29:51 -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 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180616202634.GA29371@linux1.home> <1935290.nWKu69nTtg@pinacolada> <20180616232951.GA32738@linux1.home> <20180617014233.GA1567@linux1.home> In-Reply-To: <20180617014233.GA1567@linux1.home> From: Rich Freeman Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2018 22:29:40 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] William Hubbs council manifesto 2018-2019 To: gentoo-project Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 3bb99959-c501-40fb-b87d-19b577c68eb1 X-Archives-Hash: 8f88365c276abc37876d6a45ae09084d On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 9:42 PM William Hubbs wrote: > > Keep in mind that this is already basically the case. All the trustees > have to do is stop paying for infra and revoke our permission to use the > Gentoo logo, name etc. > At most that would prevent us from using the logo/name (or it would require carefully following the logo usage guidelines), and it is pretty unlikely to happen in any case. With things as they currently stand it would be all or nothing - there is no orderly way to appeal decisions to Trustees short of the Trustees completely destroying the project, which means that there aren't any appeals. In any case, I'd much rather see us transition to a model that is more sustainable than have everybody fight over who is in charge of the model we currently have. > > My impression is that we are just waiting for robbat2 to catch up the > accounting/tax issues, so the foundation isn't in as big of a mess as > has been spread. Again, correct me if I'm wrong. > Yup, it has been just around the corner for the last 10 years as far as I've been able to tell from all the optimistic list posts over the years. However, as more information comes to light it seems like the trend has been towards us being further and further behind. Robin appears to have done a lot to help fix things, but I'll count those chickens after they hatch... > > > Regarding comrel, given that more than one person who has been removed > > > from Gentoo has threatened the foundation with law suits, I can > > > understand the trustees wanting to be in that loop. > > > > Just another good reason to not have a foundation to sue... > > Would you rather have the council and comrel members be open to being > sued individually? > > I'm no expert, but it seems like the legal entity protects us from this. I don't see how this risk goes up by having an umbrella org own the name/etc. In fact, having one that is competently managed probably would be beneficial to whatever extent it could shield individuals from being sued. That said, anybody can name anybody in a lawsuit for anything, at least in the US. That doesn't mean that they'd win. Gentoo can't stop anybody from suing you. At best it could offer to pay your legal bills, though that would be a bit of an empty promise in our current state. Keep in mind that nobody around here is an expert, and this is why we probably should stop trying to run a corporation in our spare time. That is how you end up not filing your taxes for 14 years and counting. Hopefully the IRS will exercise enforcement discretion, but it isn't really something we want to mess around with. I just don't see the benefit in having developers moonlighting as corporate officers. It is a lot of work, and it is work that for the most part hasn't been getting done. Even if Robin saves us, we're only a year away from falling behind again. Distros much larger than ours have been pulling out of this area, and the ones which seem to remain independent have a lot more funding. Also, as much as I appreciate the work Robin has done, I don't see a lot of others willing to pick up the slack if he ends up stepping down at some point either. Having these positions that are hard to fill but which legally have all kinds of power is also a source of risk, because it basically means that almost anybody can end up in one of these positions simply by running for them unopposed. If it is true that the Trustees can effectively override the Council today, then what good is it in having a vigorous debate with 20 people running for 7 council slots, if 3 random people get elected to the Trustees unopposed (or lightly opposed) and can just overturn their decisions at will? Shouldn't we be having the healthy/vigorous competition for the positions that wield the most power? -- Rich