Oliver Welter wrote: > Hi Edward, Hi List, > >>> 1. Board members must/should be active developers. >>> >>> If we want that the active developers elect the board then we must >>> define who are active developers. >> >> The reason for making board members active developers is to avoid a >> split between the board and the developers. The risk of having a board >> made completely of developers is that user issues my end up being >> ignored. What about having the majority of board members limited to >> developers and having a minority of members selected with a more "open >> democratic process". > > I think the asumption behind your thoughts does not really fit. > > The board does discuss: > * Naming Rights > * Licenses > * Administratives
> So to make it short - all this things are closely related to publish > and protect the work of the developers-team. There are no > "user-issues" so I dont know any reason why and on what users should > have a vote on this board ? Potential licensing conflicts (e.g XFree86 -> xorg) are "user issue" you might want the board to consider. Users have no right to a vote, the point is whether letting them would produce a more effective board. Obviously there are risk with having a too inclusive or too exclusive board. Edward ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf _______________________________________________ OpenCA-Devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openca-devel
