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 9F2DD1382C5 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 00:47:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D50BAE0946; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 00:47:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf0-x236.google.com (mail-pf0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::236]) (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 91A77E089B for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 00:47:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf0-x236.google.com with SMTP id u86so2437845pfd.2 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 17:47:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=JKPmrBKhi+61pSlehkrddZ9fOcAv+FeCtDscpLTAF08=; b=e6KRi/Da2WQRnZ9Zqi0e8xTe4HEBQ3aRGKOAWtsl6Dpsl22wEhSmt2SAt/qVFTjmIV JrmJABafOJOx6baqWeiOHcTTzbZmIG1bw29Zmqn0+MUez/uGc+mwG6e3ZwRpyktqphDy E7i0GQCSzRC6GFhoKuDGsQ6opNtFS0rrDHjfdDPFRt3xpuSxwWjcxE2rXh1/N0ZQqu/w /Mj7IC66lyrCUy0CakbrVY0XMyuBAfmb3/J7M2qoGHh5jrHVIA+5aXazOcgyI6/Yn2Da +07+KGpn9IP6C+shEcsJC3mTErVEAjyZdc2SyIPUjxWwTIX890wRS+VF25qzozi7Cqt9 Xx9g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JKPmrBKhi+61pSlehkrddZ9fOcAv+FeCtDscpLTAF08=; b=S84iT2frd6rLOYcZZqBkF3qkcR7v71FkXWTqc36anvv4CCiPIIPB/L3gt+L7W/LdgG h4euE0i9jPstM+xxch1d9sdccX2PJ78VLC6Xewz+1Numcw1JIWvahA8x3yzaJlpxarrG Rzo2RVALxCPGz2JcdMolrUw6MyGUJ9xmc+CFnYeoSlHCMcMObpaEcVxqVHx7dxO0nX3K XaPB/m1OC+AE+9qw0dNot5UThpMTBxwdbIJaprFh/OtAabt017sSyWJAqg/+GjKaFWM3 1NduB2eJkw0BIlJL5B8SEWJaRIigji/KYtScsqb7hNlnELGtjAOpeQ/FeTyVPcsuL+BO 6JIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7Hi7UZW03iSpV7KVOB9PcCg9VYFFI1OZUTy55+n0PZcdK1MHRUy QuJFvRMgejnbljgoQCvMq1WhUQExaFZvZcNmZY03kQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtDmQP1hgDrf5q7cXhmO+nO+m4c+bugAv+azvvmw4wtYhjxzSD3z4AL0XbKedpvpXsoVYn8iWSPuUAEm5d5ZEI= X-Received: by 10.167.129.136 with SMTP id g8mr11695553pfi.19.1522111646955; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 17:47:26 -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 Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.236.174.22 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Mar 2018 17:47:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Rich Freeman Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 20:47:26 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: OnCHZ_pzNWkDipv15IlBgGh9dDw Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Social Contract clean-up To: gentoo-project Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 55530520-2a13-49fe-ace4-e6b53eb59127 X-Archives-Hash: 218a6a96bc9b5149384ed3fdbb705f87 On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 8:39 PM, Daniel Robbins wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 6:15 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> >> >> Wouldn't it make sense to have these assigned to the council? >> >> GLEP 39 states that "Global issues will be decided by an elected >> Gentoo Council." Surely the social contract is a global issue, and I >> don't see any exception in GLEP 39 pertaining to the social contract >> specifically > > > No -- it's a trustee issue. GLEP 39 is not written very well and is not > explicit in what it means by "global issues", but in context it is pretty > clear the Council is meant to address project-related problems that bothered > ciaranm and g2boojum at the time, thus technical problems, and "global > issues" are technical issues that span multiple projects. GLEP 39 explicitly states that disciplinary matters are to be appealed to the council, so clearly it isn't talking merely of technical issues. > And if you look at the definition of trustee responsibilities, "Oversee > Adherence to the Social Contract" is one of them. This includes overseeing > the Social Contract itself. This is not part of the bylaws or articles of incorporation, and it isn't clear who wrote that page, or from where their power was delegated. And the wording does not actually say that this includes overseeing the social contract, but merely its enforcement (though with any disciplinary actions being appealed to the Council it would seem subject to that limitation). In any case, I'll admit that the original definitions of the structure are a bit murky, but given that the Foundation is struggling just to straighten out its books wouldn't it make sense to make revisions so as to minimize the scope of their responsibilities so that they can try to sustain the functions that we're still stuck with them handling until a better solution is found? -- Rich