After having written this, I realized I might be telegraphing a bit too much in places. So take the amplifications for what they are worth. They are more "lawyer like" than my original response, but I don't see how to put them into a manifesto.
On Fri, 2008-06-06 at 01:37 +0000, Ferris McCormick wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:33:34 +0100 > Roy Bamford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 2008.06.05 01:00, Łukasz Damentko wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > Nominations for the Gentoo Council 2008/2009 are open now and will be > > > open for the next two weeks (until 23:59 UTC, 18/06/2008). > > > > Team, > > > > I don't want to nominate anyone who hasn't been nominated already. > > I would like to address all the candidates who have or will accept > > council nominations. > > > > 1. Please tell us how/if you plan to fix GLEP 39. (You may not consider > > it broken) > > > Mostly it's not broken. However, I think the intent of the rule > "If any meeting has less than 50% attendance by council members,..." > is to prevent the council from meeting without a quorum. If at a > meeting they don't have a quorum and thus don't meet, I'd consider that > to be a non-meeting and treat those who did not make it just as "absent" > under normal meeting rules. > And the bit about hearing appeals assumes that devrel initiated the disciplinary action being appealed. I'd make it explicit that Council is not itself a disciplinary body --- resolving conflicts is what devrel is for among other things. > > 2. As one of the first priorities will be setting policy for pending > > appeals what policy do you propose ? > > > Any developer making an appeal would explain why the appeal should be > successful using any information he chooses, then Council would decide > (deny, grant on the merits, grant on procedural grounds, whatever). > I'd also add two new requirements: > 1. Any appeal must be heard and decided within xxx days; > 2. Any Council member who is on record as to the merits of the action > being appealed could not take part in the appeal process unless the > developer making the appeal allows it. Probably this would mean a > discussion between that developer and the Council. > Of course Council members have opinions of devrel actions, but I think > it creates a potential conflict of interest if they broadcast them. Plus a few more: 3. When I say "explains" I mean publicly on IRC; 4. And the explanation is a dialogue --- people may ask questions of each other, request further information, and so on. 5. Procedural grounds refers to failure to follow procedure, not letting the developer appealing know what he's done to merit the discipline, not giving the developer an opportunity to respond, and such like. 6. I don't see much merit in giving devrel a role in the appeal. Whatever they have done should already have been documented. However in any specific appeal, Council should have the option to involve devrel. > > 3. If you are not on the council already, how will you make time for > > the extra work? > > I already have the time, really. Although I am a member of several > projects in Gentoo, right now only Trustees require much time. > > > 4. How do you think the council and trustees can work together to make > > Gentoo better? > > Not just the code base but the cooperative environment we all work > > together in too. > > Disclosure - I have a personal interest in responses as a trustee. > > > > I'm already a trustee, so having a council member who is a trustee is > a start. > Trustees and Council together are responsible for the smooth working > of Gentoo, but with largely complementary areas of authority. So I > think the two groups should begin by looking for places they both can > usefully contribute and work to put cooperation there in place (Code > of Conduct comes to mind because it applies to the entire community > but Council is pretty much limited to developers). Then set out to > put such cooperation in place. > There's a lot of hand-waving in that statement because I don't have > any specific mechanism for carrying it out in mind. > Another idea is to sit down and look at just what Gentoo's business > model is. We know there is one because the Foundation owns things > like trademarks or funds (as it must because you have to have some > sort of legal entity in place to do that). But the Foundation is not > much involved directly in performing technical guidance, say (although > I can think of cases where it might be). I personally think it makes > sense to look at bringing the two closer together to look more like a > traditional business (although this is perhaps a minority view). For > our continued health I think we have to work toward this goal. This is badly stated. Perhaps it would help if I mentioned that in my view, Gentoo exists for its community, not just for the developers. > > 5. Tell us a little about yourself - the skills and experience you can > > bring to the council? > > > I've been around for a long time in the business world as a developer, > manager, and lawyer. (I might actually be Gentoo's oldest > developer.) > I've been a Gentoo developer for a bit more than 4 years. In > Gentoo I'm sparc (architecture) lead, a trustee, and a member of devrel > and userrel. I am no longer all that strong technically, but > I think I have a pretty good feel for how the software development > process works. And both within Gentoo and in the real world I have > spent a lot of time working with people in areas like mediation or > management. So I guess I'd say I'm a "people oriented" person with a > reasonable understanding of the development process, but certainly not > Gentoo's strongest technical person. > > 6. Tell us one outstanding (in your own mind) contribution you made to > > Gentoo in the last year. > > > I am happiest with my part in making the Foundation legal > again. I was elected sparc lead and elected to the trustees, but I > hardly view those as contributions. > > Any candidate who does not have time/interest to prepare a manifesto > > addressing the above and anything else they want to say to the > > electorate will have a hard time convincing me that they have the time/ > > interest to undertake the duties of a council member. > > > > I look forward to seeing links to your manifestos on > > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/voting-logs/council-2008- > > nominees.xml > > > > > I'll provide a link in the next week or so. Most likely to a link to a > text file in d.g.o/~fmccor/ > > - -- > > Regards, > > > > Roy Bamford > > (NeddySeagoon) a member of > > gentoo-ops > > forum-mods > > treecleaners > > trustees > > > > For the avoidance of doubt, I write as an individual developer and not > > on behalf of any project I may be a member of. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) > > > > iEYEARECAAYFAkhIMYQACgkQTE4/y7nJvasByACg24Z2Qw4OPMbLPAGwoRAG/8hG > > rswAn3E/B28l95e2rHTbnHX8SKgWfVM1 > > =yVuz > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > -- > > gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list > > > Hope this helps, > Regards, > Ferris > > - -- > Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Developer, Gentoo Linux (Sparc, Devrel, Userrel, Trustees) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkhIlNkACgkQQa6M3+I///eyggCeJFr83dO741dhyqHPDFrOH4Re > ERkAoIuTKJBhAPzP0oVhR2X8ldCzeN1U > =HFe9 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Sorry for the double response, Regards, Ferris -- Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Gentoo Linux (Devrel, Sparc, Userrel, Trustees)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
