On Wednesday 14 March 2007 01:25, Grant Goodyear wrote: > Ubuntu uses "Community Council". I suggested "Community Relations". > *Shrug* "Community Relations" sounds fine to me. > > Here's my problem with it: essentially what you're arguing for the > proctors to be is the same as what devrel should be (at least for the > part of devrel that is supposed to be looking after community > standards). If you're creating a new group because of distrust of > devrel, then it makes more sense to either fix devrel (assuming it needs > fixing), or disband that part, or put your trust in devrel's current > incarnation. (My personal view is that we've had a nearly complete > turnover in devrel multiple times since the last set of significant > problems, so people should give them a chance, but I realize it's not my > call to make.) In any event, the fact that devrel/proctor/whatever > decisions can be appealed to the council actually does makes claims of > bias less tenable. Yeah, that was my argument as well.
I fear new rules are not going to change that. In my eyes the essential thing is that we have strong body (devrel/comrel/protctors) to encourage people to follow policy (wether new or old). Making devs live up to higher standards as a good example would also be encouraging to the process I think. -- Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen (Jaervosz)
pgpJvtUKD2IFR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
