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 C56B41382C5 for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 03:22:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7BFC9E07DB; Mon, 3 May 2021 03:22:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (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 46128E07D8 for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 03:22:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (nullmailer pid 31620 invoked by uid 1000); Mon, 03 May 2021 03:22:10 -0000 Date: Sun, 2 May 2021 22:22:10 -0500 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] call for agenda items -- council meeting 2021-05-09 Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org References: <4775262.irdbgypaU6@pinacolada> 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/GYMU55wm+goxwas" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Archives-Salt: fb41c973-86ad-48f3-938e-65f3ed96bfd5 X-Archives-Hash: 93fb80118b73adb2d86dff141bfeda03 --/GYMU55wm+goxwas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, May 02, 2021 at 09:07:11PM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > Hi, >=20 > On 2021-05-01 17:14, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > There's rumors going around that Agostino's tinderbox basically > > already burned through our entire 2021 AWS Open Source credit budget > > and has overdrawn it significantly. > >=20 > > Independent of whether this rumor is true or not, I would like to > > discuss > > * how we can avoid such a situation in the future, > > * and how we can fairly handle the distribution of limited infra > > resources that may end up costing us money >=20 > Is this really a topic for council? >=20 > Isn't foundation an independent body and if someone requests funding=20 > from foundation and will get it approved... >=20 > Or in other words: Can council veto against funding requests the=20 > foundation received and wants to approve? =20 The way I see it is, if the council wants funding for something they can request it from the foundation, but I don't think they can direct the foundation not to fund something someone else requests. Also, given Antarus' response in the thread, I'm not sure there is anything for council to discuss. Thanks, William --/GYMU55wm+goxwas Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQTVeuxEZo4uUHOkQAluVBb0MMRlOAUCYI9sXAAKCRBuVBb0MMRl OBWHAJ41BnaOAR7dZBI+LBOqV01gBxNJPgCfZHkpilXYIPqyTiTQtyseyc2f7hw= =PBFR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/GYMU55wm+goxwas--