en/glep/glep-0039.html

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<!--
This HTML is auto-generated.  DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE!  If you are writing a new
PEP, see http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0001.html for instructions and links
to templates.  DO NOT USE THIS HTML FILE AS YOUR TEMPLATE!
-->
<head>
  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
  <meta name="generator" content="Docutils 0.4: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/" />
  <title>GLEP 39 -- An "old-school" metastructure proposal with "boot for being a slacker"</title>
  <link rel="stylesheet" href="tools/glep.css" type="text/css" />
</head>
<body bgcolor="white">
<table class="navigation" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"
       width="100%" border="0">
<tr><td class="navicon" width="150" height="35">
<a href="http://www.gentoo.org/" title="Gentoo Linux Home Page">
<img src="http://www.gentoo.org/images/gentoo-new.gif" alt="[Gentoo]"
 border="0" width="150" height="35" /></a></td>
<td class="textlinks" align="left">
[<b><a href="http://www.gentoo.org/">Gentoo Linux Home</a></b>]
[<b><a href="http://www.gentoo.org/peps">GLEP Index</a></b>]
[<b><a href="http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.txt">GLEP Source</a></b>]
</td></tr></table>
<table class="rfc2822 docutils field-list" frame="void" rules="none">
<col class="field-name" />
<col class="field-body" />
<tbody valign="top">
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">GLEP:</th><td class="field-body">39</td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Title:</th><td class="field-body">An &quot;old-school&quot; metastructure proposal with &quot;boot for being a slacker&quot;</td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Version:</th><td class="field-body">1.3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Last-Modified:</th><td class="field-body"><a class="reference" href="http://www.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.txt?cvsroot=gentoo">2007/10/12 02:08:27</a></td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Author:</th><td class="field-body">Grant Goodyear &lt;g2boojum&#32;&#97;t&#32;gentoo.org&gt;,
Ciaran McCreesh &lt;ciaranm&#32;&#97;t&#32;gentoo.org&gt;,</td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Status:</th><td class="field-body">Accepted</td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Type:</th><td class="field-body">Informational</td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Content-Type:</th><td class="field-body"><a class="reference" href="glep-0002.html">text/x-rst</a></td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Created:</th><td class="field-body">01-Sep-2005</td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Replaced-By:</th><td class="field-body"><a class="reference" href="http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glepglep-0054.html">54</a></td>
</tr>
<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Post-History:</th><td class="field-body">01-Sep-2005, 09-Feb-2006</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<hr />
<div class="contents topic">
<p class="topic-title first"><a id="contents" name="contents">Contents</a></p>
<ul class="simple">
<li><a class="reference" href="#status" id="id2" name="id2">Status</a></li>
<li><a class="reference" href="#abstract" id="id3" name="id3">Abstract</a></li>
<li><a class="reference" href="#motivation" id="id4" name="id4">Motivation</a></li>
<li><a class="reference" href="#specification" id="id5" name="id5">Specification</a></li>
<li><a class="reference" href="#rationale" id="id6" name="id6">Rationale</a></li>
<li><a class="reference" href="#copyright" id="id7" name="id7">Copyright</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="section">
<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id2" id="status" name="status">Status</a></h1>
<p>Implemented. GLEP amended on 09 Feb 2006 to add the final bullet point to
list B in <a class="reference" href="#specification">Specification</a>.</p>
</div>
<div class="section">
<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id3" id="abstract" name="abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
<p>GLEP 4 is replaced with a new &quot;metastructure&quot; that retains established
projects (and makes new projects easier to create), but adds a new &quot;Gentoo
Council&quot; to handle global (cross-project) issues.</p>
</div>
<div class="section">
<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id4" id="motivation" name="motivation">Motivation</a></h1>
<p>The Fosdem and subsequent reform proposals shepherded by Koon are thorough,
extremely detailed, and somewhat complicated.  They have a lot of good ideas.
For many who have been with Gentoo a long time, though, there's just something
about them that they don't really like.  More than a few Gentoo devs are
almost entirely uninterested in metastructure as long as it doesn't get in
their way, and because the current proposals impose at least some order on our
unruly devs these proposals are guaranteed to &quot;get in the way&quot; to some degree.
For example, a frequent comment that has been heard is that many Gentoo devs
don't know who his/her manager (or project lead) is, which is a clear
indication that our current system is broken.  The existing proposals solve
the problem by requiring that each dev belong to a project.  Perhaps the part
that is broken, though, is the belief that every dev should have a manager.
The history of Gentoo is such that traditionally big advances have often been
implemented by a single or a small number of dedicated devs (thus our
long-standing tradition that devs have access to the entire tree), and surely
we do not want to make things harder (or less fun) for such people.  So here's
a minimal proposal for those who remembers the &quot;good ol' days&quot; and thinks
things aren't really so different now.</p>
<p>Synopsis of the current system:</p>
<blockquote>
<ul class="simple">
<li>There are 13-15 top-level projects (TLPs).  Top-level projects are
comprised of sub-projects, and the goal was that every Gentoo
project would be a sub-project of one of the TLPs.  Supposedly each
dev therefore belongs to one or more TLPs.</li>
<li>Each TLP has at least a &quot;strategic&quot; manager, and potentially also an
&quot;operational&quot; manager.  Only the strategic managers vote on global
Gentoo issues.</li>
<li>The managers of each TLP were appointed by drobbins, the other
TLP managers, or elected by their project members.  These managers
have no set term.</li>
<li>Within each TLP the managers are responsible for making decisions
about the project, defining clear goals, roadmaps, and timelines
for the project, and solving problems that arise within the TLP
(see GLEP 4 for the specific list).</li>
<li>The strategic TLP managers are also responsible for deciding issues that
affect Gentoo across project lines.  The primary mechanism for
handling global-scope issues is the managers' meetings.</li>
<li>Disciplinary action taken against erring devs is handled by the
&quot;devrel&quot; TLP, unless the dev is a strategic TLP manager.  In that
case disciplinary action must be enacted by the other strategic TLP
managers.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>Problems with the existing system:</p>
<ol class="arabic simple">
<li>The assumption that TLPs are complete is either incorrect (there
still is no &quot;server&quot; TLP) or just plain weird (but the lack of a
server TLP is technically okay because all devs who don't have an
obvious TLP belong to the &quot;base&quot; TLP by default).</li>
<li>There is nothing at all to ensure that project leads actually do
represent the devs they supposedly lead or satisfy their
responsibilities.  Indeed, should a TLP manager go AWOL it is not at
all obvious how the situation should be resolved.</li>
<li>Nothing is being decided at global scope right now.  Some TLP strategic
managers rarely attend the managers' meetings, and the managers as a
whole certainly are not providing any sort of global vision for
Gentoo right now.</li>
<li>Even if the strategic TLP managers were making global decisions for
Gentoo, the TLP structure is such that almost all devs fall under
only one or two TLPs.  Thus voting on global issues is hardly
proportional, and thus many devs feel disenfranchised.</li>
<li>Regardless of whether or not it is justified, devrel is loathed by
many in its enforcement role.</li>
</ol>
<p>Here's a couple of additional problems identified by the current
metastructure reform proposals:</p>
<ol class="arabic simple" start="6">
<li>The current system has no mechanism for identifying either projects
or devs that have gone inactive.</li>
<li>Bugs that cut across projects often remain unresolved.</li>
<li>GLEPs often linger in an undetermined state.</li>
</ol>
</div>
<div class="section">
<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id5" id="specification" name="specification">Specification</a></h1>
<ol class="upperalpha">
<li><p class="first">A project is a group of developers working towards a goal (or a set
of goals).</p>
<blockquote>
<ul class="simple">
<li>A project exists if it has a web page at
www.g.o/proj/en/whatever that is maintained.  (&quot;Maintained&quot; means
that the information on the page is factually correct and not
out-of-date.)  If the webpage isn't maintained, it is presumed dead.</li>
<li>It may have one or many leads, and the leads are
selected by the members of the project.  This selection must
occur at least once every 12 months, and may occur at any
time.</li>
<li>It may have zero or more sub-projects.  Sub-projects are
just projects that provide some additional structure, and their
web pages are in the project's space.</li>
<li>Not everything (or everyone) needs a project.</li>
<li>Projects need not be long-term.</li>
<li>Projects may well conflict with other projects.  That's okay.</li>
<li>Any dev may create a new project just by creating a new page
(or, more realistically, directory and page) in
<tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en</span></tt>.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</li>
<li><p class="first">Global issues will be decided by an elected Gentoo council.</p>
<blockquote>
<ul class="simple">
<li>There will be a set number of council members.  (For the
first election that number was set to 7 by acclamation.)</li>
<li>Council members will be chosen by a general election of all
devs once per year.</li>
<li>The council must hold an open meeting at least once per month.</li>
<li>Council decisions are by majority vote of those who show up (or
their proxies).</li>
<li>If a council member (or their appointed proxy) fails to show up for
two consecutive meetings, they are marked as a slacker.</li>
<li>If a council member who has been marked a slacker misses any further
meeting (or their appointed proxy doesn't show up), they lose their
position and a new election is held to replace that person. The newly
elected council member gets a 'reduced' term so that the yearly
elections still elect a full group.</li>
<li>Council members who have previously been booted for excessive slacking
may stand for future elections, including the election for their
replacement. They should, however, justify their slackerness, and
should expect to have it pointed out if they don't do so themselves.</li>
<li>The 'slacker' marker is reset when a member is elected.</li>
<li>If any meeting has less than 50% attendance by council members, a new
election for <em>all</em> places must be held within a month. The 'one year'
is then reset from that point.</li>
<li>Disciplinary actions may be appealed to the council.</li>
<li>A proxy must not be an existing council member, and any single person
may not be a proxy for more than one council member at any given
meeting.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
</div>
<div class="section">
<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id6" id="rationale" name="rationale">Rationale</a></h1>
<p>So, does this proposal solve any of the previously-mentioned problems?</p>
<p>1. There is no longer any requirement that the project structure be
complete.  Some devs work on very specific parts of the tree, while
some work on practically everything; neither should be shoehorned into
an ad-hoc project structure.  Moreover, it should be easy to create new
projects where needed (and remove them when they are not), which this
proposal should enable.</p>
<p>2. By having the members choose their project leads periodically, the
project leads are necessarily at least somewhat responsible (and hopefully
responsive) to the project members.  This proposal has removed the list of
responsibilities that project leads were supposed to satisfy, since hardly
anybody has ever looked at the original list since it was written.  Instead
the practical responsibility of a lead is &quot;whatever the members require&quot;, and
if that isn't satisfied, the members can get a new lead (if they can find
somebody to take the job!).</p>
<p>3. If the council does a lousy job handling global issues (or has no
global vision), vote out the bums.</p>
<p>4. Since everybody gets to vote for the council members, at least in
principle the council members represent all developers, not just a
particular subset.</p>
<p>5. An appeal process should make disciplinary enforcement both less
capricious and more palatable.</p>
<p>6. This proposal doesn't help find inactive devs or projects.  It
really should not be that much of a problem.  We already have a script for
identifying devs who haven't made a CVS commit within a certain period of
time.  As for moribund projects, if the project page isn't maintained, it's
dead, and we should remove it.  That, too, could be automated.  A much bigger
problem is understaffed herds, but more organization is not necessarily a
solution.</p>
<p>7. The metabug project is a great idea.  Let's do that!  Adding a useful
project shouldn't require &quot;metastructure reform&quot;, although with the
current system it does.  With this proposal it wouldn't.</p>
<ol class="arabic simple" start="8">
<li>This proposal has nothing to say about GLEPs.</li>
</ol>
</div>
<div class="section">
<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id7" id="copyright" name="copyright">Copyright</a></h1>
<p>This document has been placed in the public domain.</p>
</div>

</div>
<div class="footer">
<hr class="footer" />
<a class="reference" href="glep-0039.txt">View document source</a>.
Generated on: 2007-10-12 02:09 UTC.
Generated by <a class="reference" href="http://docutils.sourceforge.net/">Docutils</a> from <a class="reference" href="http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html">reStructuredText</a> source.

</div>
</body>
</html>

1	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
2	<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
3	<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
4	<!--
5	This HTML is auto-generated. DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE! If you are writing a new
6	PEP, see http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0001.html for instructions and links
7	to templates. DO NOT USE THIS HTML FILE AS YOUR TEMPLATE!
8	-->
9	<head>
10	<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
11	<meta name="generator" content="Docutils 0.4: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/" />
12	<title>GLEP 39 -- An "old-school" metastructure proposal with "boot for being a slacker"</title>
13	<link rel="stylesheet" href="tools/glep.css" type="text/css" />
14	</head>
15	<body bgcolor="white">
16	<table class="navigation" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"
17	width="100%" border="0">
18	<tr><td class="navicon" width="150" height="35">
19	<a href="http://www.gentoo.org/" title="Gentoo Linux Home Page">
20	<img src="http://www.gentoo.org/images/gentoo-new.gif" alt="[Gentoo]"
21	border="0" width="150" height="35" /></a></td>
22	<td class="textlinks" align="left">
23	[<b><a href="http://www.gentoo.org/">Gentoo Linux Home</a></b>]
24	[<b><a href="http://www.gentoo.org/peps">GLEP Index</a></b>]
25	[<b><a href="http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.txt">GLEP Source</a></b>]
26	</td></tr></table>
27	<table class="rfc2822 docutils field-list" frame="void" rules="none">
28	<col class="field-name" />
29	<col class="field-body" />
30	<tbody valign="top">
31	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">GLEP:</th><td class="field-body">39</td>
32	</tr>
33	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Title:</th><td class="field-body">An "old-school" metastructure proposal with "boot for being a slacker"</td>
34	</tr>
35	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Version:</th><td class="field-body">1.3</td>
36	</tr>
37	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Last-Modified:</th><td class="field-body"><a class="reference" href="http://www.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/xml/htdocs/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.txt?cvsroot=gentoo">2007/10/12 02:08:27</a></td>
38	</tr>
39	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Author:</th><td class="field-body">Grant Goodyear <g2boojum at gentoo.org>,
40	Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm at gentoo.org>,</td>
41	</tr>
42	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Status:</th><td class="field-body">Accepted</td>
43	</tr>
44	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Type:</th><td class="field-body">Informational</td>
45	</tr>
46	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Content-Type:</th><td class="field-body"><a class="reference" href="glep-0002.html">text/x-rst</a></td>
47	</tr>
48	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Created:</th><td class="field-body">01-Sep-2005</td>
49	</tr>
50	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Replaced-By:</th><td class="field-body"><a class="reference" href="http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glepglep-0054.html">54</a></td>
51	</tr>
52	<tr class="field"><th class="field-name">Post-History:</th><td class="field-body">01-Sep-2005, 09-Feb-2006</td>
53	</tr>
54	</tbody>
55	</table>
56	<hr />
57	<div class="contents topic">
58	<p class="topic-title first"><a id="contents" name="contents">Contents</a></p>
59	<ul class="simple">
60	<li><a class="reference" href="#status" id="id2" name="id2">Status</a></li>
61	<li><a class="reference" href="#abstract" id="id3" name="id3">Abstract</a></li>
62	<li><a class="reference" href="#motivation" id="id4" name="id4">Motivation</a></li>
63	<li><a class="reference" href="#specification" id="id5" name="id5">Specification</a></li>
64	<li><a class="reference" href="#rationale" id="id6" name="id6">Rationale</a></li>
65	<li><a class="reference" href="#copyright" id="id7" name="id7">Copyright</a></li>
66	</ul>
67	</div>
68	<div class="section">
69	<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id2" id="status" name="status">Status</a></h1>
70	<p>Implemented. GLEP amended on 09 Feb 2006 to add the final bullet point to
71	list B in <a class="reference" href="#specification">Specification</a>.</p>
72	</div>
73	<div class="section">
74	<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id3" id="abstract" name="abstract">Abstract</a></h1>
75	<p>GLEP 4 is replaced with a new "metastructure" that retains established
76	projects (and makes new projects easier to create), but adds a new "Gentoo
77	Council" to handle global (cross-project) issues.</p>
78	</div>
79	<div class="section">
80	<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id4" id="motivation" name="motivation">Motivation</a></h1>
81	<p>The Fosdem and subsequent reform proposals shepherded by Koon are thorough,
82	extremely detailed, and somewhat complicated. They have a lot of good ideas.
83	For many who have been with Gentoo a long time, though, there's just something
84	about them that they don't really like. More than a few Gentoo devs are
85	almost entirely uninterested in metastructure as long as it doesn't get in
86	their way, and because the current proposals impose at least some order on our
87	unruly devs these proposals are guaranteed to "get in the way" to some degree.
88	For example, a frequent comment that has been heard is that many Gentoo devs
89	don't know who his/her manager (or project lead) is, which is a clear
90	indication that our current system is broken. The existing proposals solve
91	the problem by requiring that each dev belong to a project. Perhaps the part
92	that is broken, though, is the belief that every dev should have a manager.
93	The history of Gentoo is such that traditionally big advances have often been
94	implemented by a single or a small number of dedicated devs (thus our
95	long-standing tradition that devs have access to the entire tree), and surely
96	we do not want to make things harder (or less fun) for such people. So here's
97	a minimal proposal for those who remembers the "good ol' days" and thinks
98	things aren't really so different now.</p>
99	<p>Synopsis of the current system:</p>
100	<blockquote>
101	<ul class="simple">
102	<li>There are 13-15 top-level projects (TLPs). Top-level projects are
103	comprised of sub-projects, and the goal was that every Gentoo
104	project would be a sub-project of one of the TLPs. Supposedly each
105	dev therefore belongs to one or more TLPs.</li>
106	<li>Each TLP has at least a "strategic" manager, and potentially also an
107	"operational" manager. Only the strategic managers vote on global
108	Gentoo issues.</li>
109	<li>The managers of each TLP were appointed by drobbins, the other
110	TLP managers, or elected by their project members. These managers
111	have no set term.</li>
112	<li>Within each TLP the managers are responsible for making decisions
113	about the project, defining clear goals, roadmaps, and timelines
114	for the project, and solving problems that arise within the TLP
115	(see GLEP 4 for the specific list).</li>
116	<li>The strategic TLP managers are also responsible for deciding issues that
117	affect Gentoo across project lines. The primary mechanism for
118	handling global-scope issues is the managers' meetings.</li>
119	<li>Disciplinary action taken against erring devs is handled by the
120	"devrel" TLP, unless the dev is a strategic TLP manager. In that
121	case disciplinary action must be enacted by the other strategic TLP
122	managers.</li>
123	</ul>
124	</blockquote>
125	<p>Problems with the existing system:</p>
126	<ol class="arabic simple">
127	<li>The assumption that TLPs are complete is either incorrect (there
128	still is no "server" TLP) or just plain weird (but the lack of a
129	server TLP is technically okay because all devs who don't have an
130	obvious TLP belong to the "base" TLP by default).</li>
131	<li>There is nothing at all to ensure that project leads actually do
132	represent the devs they supposedly lead or satisfy their
133	responsibilities. Indeed, should a TLP manager go AWOL it is not at
134	all obvious how the situation should be resolved.</li>
135	<li>Nothing is being decided at global scope right now. Some TLP strategic
136	managers rarely attend the managers' meetings, and the managers as a
137	whole certainly are not providing any sort of global vision for
138	Gentoo right now.</li>
139	<li>Even if the strategic TLP managers were making global decisions for
140	Gentoo, the TLP structure is such that almost all devs fall under
141	only one or two TLPs. Thus voting on global issues is hardly
142	proportional, and thus many devs feel disenfranchised.</li>
143	<li>Regardless of whether or not it is justified, devrel is loathed by
144	many in its enforcement role.</li>
145	</ol>
146	<p>Here's a couple of additional problems identified by the current
147	metastructure reform proposals:</p>
148	<ol class="arabic simple" start="6">
149	<li>The current system has no mechanism for identifying either projects
150	or devs that have gone inactive.</li>
151	<li>Bugs that cut across projects often remain unresolved.</li>
152	<li>GLEPs often linger in an undetermined state.</li>
153	</ol>
154	</div>
155	<div class="section">
156	<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id5" id="specification" name="specification">Specification</a></h1>
157	<ol class="upperalpha">
158	<li><p class="first">A project is a group of developers working towards a goal (or a set
159	of goals).</p>
160	<blockquote>
161	<ul class="simple">
162	<li>A project exists if it has a web page at
163	www.g.o/proj/en/whatever that is maintained. ("Maintained" means
164	that the information on the page is factually correct and not
165	out-of-date.) If the webpage isn't maintained, it is presumed dead.</li>
166	<li>It may have one or many leads, and the leads are
167	selected by the members of the project. This selection must
168	occur at least once every 12 months, and may occur at any
169	time.</li>
170	<li>It may have zero or more sub-projects. Sub-projects are
171	just projects that provide some additional structure, and their
172	web pages are in the project's space.</li>
173	<li>Not everything (or everyone) needs a project.</li>
174	<li>Projects need not be long-term.</li>
175	<li>Projects may well conflict with other projects. That's okay.</li>
176	<li>Any dev may create a new project just by creating a new page
177	(or, more realistically, directory and page) in
178	<tt class="docutils literal"><span class="pre">gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en</span></tt>.</li>
179	</ul>
180	</blockquote>
181	</li>
182	<li><p class="first">Global issues will be decided by an elected Gentoo council.</p>
183	<blockquote>
184	<ul class="simple">
185	<li>There will be a set number of council members. (For the
186	first election that number was set to 7 by acclamation.)</li>
187	<li>Council members will be chosen by a general election of all
188	devs once per year.</li>
189	<li>The council must hold an open meeting at least once per month.</li>
190	<li>Council decisions are by majority vote of those who show up (or
191	their proxies).</li>
192	<li>If a council member (or their appointed proxy) fails to show up for
193	two consecutive meetings, they are marked as a slacker.</li>
194	<li>If a council member who has been marked a slacker misses any further
195	meeting (or their appointed proxy doesn't show up), they lose their
196	position and a new election is held to replace that person. The newly
197	elected council member gets a 'reduced' term so that the yearly
198	elections still elect a full group.</li>
199	<li>Council members who have previously been booted for excessive slacking
200	may stand for future elections, including the election for their
201	replacement. They should, however, justify their slackerness, and
202	should expect to have it pointed out if they don't do so themselves.</li>
203	<li>The 'slacker' marker is reset when a member is elected.</li>
204	<li>If any meeting has less than 50% attendance by council members, a new
205	election for <em>all</em> places must be held within a month. The 'one year'
206	is then reset from that point.</li>
207	<li>Disciplinary actions may be appealed to the council.</li>
208	<li>A proxy must not be an existing council member, and any single person
209	may not be a proxy for more than one council member at any given
210	meeting.</li>
211	</ul>
212	</blockquote>
213	</li>
214	</ol>
215	</div>
216	<div class="section">
217	<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id6" id="rationale" name="rationale">Rationale</a></h1>
218	<p>So, does this proposal solve any of the previously-mentioned problems?</p>
219	<p>1. There is no longer any requirement that the project structure be
220	complete. Some devs work on very specific parts of the tree, while
221	some work on practically everything; neither should be shoehorned into
222	an ad-hoc project structure. Moreover, it should be easy to create new
223	projects where needed (and remove them when they are not), which this
224	proposal should enable.</p>
225	<p>2. By having the members choose their project leads periodically, the
226	project leads are necessarily at least somewhat responsible (and hopefully
227	responsive) to the project members. This proposal has removed the list of
228	responsibilities that project leads were supposed to satisfy, since hardly
229	anybody has ever looked at the original list since it was written. Instead
230	the practical responsibility of a lead is "whatever the members require", and
231	if that isn't satisfied, the members can get a new lead (if they can find
232	somebody to take the job!).</p>
233	<p>3. If the council does a lousy job handling global issues (or has no
234	global vision), vote out the bums.</p>
235	<p>4. Since everybody gets to vote for the council members, at least in
236	principle the council members represent all developers, not just a
237	particular subset.</p>
238	<p>5. An appeal process should make disciplinary enforcement both less
239	capricious and more palatable.</p>
240	<p>6. This proposal doesn't help find inactive devs or projects. It
241	really should not be that much of a problem. We already have a script for
242	identifying devs who haven't made a CVS commit within a certain period of
243	time. As for moribund projects, if the project page isn't maintained, it's
244	dead, and we should remove it. That, too, could be automated. A much bigger
245	problem is understaffed herds, but more organization is not necessarily a
246	solution.</p>
247	<p>7. The metabug project is a great idea. Let's do that! Adding a useful
248	project shouldn't require "metastructure reform", although with the
249	current system it does. With this proposal it wouldn't.</p>
250	<ol class="arabic simple" start="8">
251	<li>This proposal has nothing to say about GLEPs.</li>
252	</ol>
253	</div>
254	<div class="section">
255	<h1><a class="toc-backref" href="#id7" id="copyright" name="copyright">Copyright</a></h1>
256	<p>This document has been placed in the public domain.</p>
257	</div>
258
259	</div>
260	<div class="footer">
261	<hr class="footer" />
262	<a class="reference" href="glep-0039.txt">View document source</a>.
263	Generated on: 2007-10-12 02:09 UTC.
264	Generated by <a class="reference" href="http://docutils.sourceforge.net/">Docutils</a> from <a class="reference" href="http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html">reStructuredText</a> source.
265
266	</div>
267	</body>
268	</html>
269