Looking through the Council project page, the policy regarding the inactive council members doesn't look optimal to me
"To ensure that the council stays active, the chosen metastructure model says that if a council member (or their appointed proxy) fails to show up for two consecutive meetings, they are marked as a slacker."
So the attendance to council meetings is enough to prove that a member is active? 0_o
How about the participation to the discussions which took place every day on our mailing lists or in IRC? I guess not since we need to explicitly bring each issue to the meeting so council can talk about it. So it is ok to discuss and decide on a topic without knowning all the previous discussion which took place on the mailing list. Because I really doubt that *all* council members are reading the mailing list in daily basis so they get to know everything that is going on to Gentoo.
The role of the council is the following one:
"The elected Gentoo Council decides on global issues and policies that affect multiple projects in Gentoo"
I am not sure that everybody is aware of the councils' role. The only council members who look active to me are Petteri and Denis. We miss 5 more people but I am pretty sure they will be present to the next meeting hence they will be considered as "active members". This is why the current policy looks wrong to me.
A stricter rule should apply and clearly define when a council members is slacking and hence it has to be substituted immediately. Council is the core project of Gentoo ( at least it should be ) and it cannot afford inactive members.
And because talk is cheap and we already burned our keyboards out the last few days here is my proposal:
A council member is inactive when:
1) He is inactive in critical discussions ( such as the whole Phoenix discussion ) for a certain period of time
2) Fails to accomplish his role by supervising the Gentoo projects. Remember we have plenty of Gentoo projects nearly dead and there is no way for us to participate since contacting the project leaders is a no-go. Indirect question: Is the council aware of the status of all projects? Shouldn't it be since he is responsible for them?
3) Fails to attend the meetings. But this should be the last proof of their activity
If a council member is declared "inactive" then it will be substituted by the next non-elected member.
Please, tell me exactly what does the "global issues and policies that affect multiple projects in Gentoo" means. What is your current role and ? It seems quite abstract to me so I am requesting you to elaborate.
I feel sorry to admit that the current council failed to become a good leader for Gentoo and his inactivity demotivates both users and developers [ etc etc ]
On Sunday 11 April 2010 16:16:37 Markos Chandras wrote:
> Hello folks,
Sorry for the html email. Kmail betrayed me once again
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
> Hello folks,
> Looking through the Council project page, the policy regarding the
> council members doesn't look optimal to me
> "To ensure that the council stays active, the chosen metastructure
> model says
> that if a council member (or their appointed proxy) fails to show up
> for two
> consecutive meetings, they are marked as a slacker."
Thats from GLEP39. The council has already ruled that they cannot
change GLEP39 without a general vote of all Gentoo devs.
This suggests you need to present your proposals as an amendment to
GLEP39 and that all devs need to vote on it.
Others have already pointed out a few issues with your proposal, so
I'll stop there.
(Neddyseagoon) a member of