On Tuesday 02 October 2007, Steve Long wrote: > Agreed, as it leaves Gentoo without a Council for a month, and you could > end up with no consistency at all viz date of elections. Stating that the > officials must be selected before the nomination process can be started, > and that the same deadline applies (one month of nominations, one of > voting) seems like good planning. Might as well get the whole process > sorted with one vote and move on.
this was all cleared up the last meeting > I also concur with whoever said Council meeting notifications should be > discussed on project (maybe a reply-to project for the notification if it > needs to go to dev to ensure everyone sees it) since the discussion is > rarely about technical stuff, despite that being most of the work which the > Council does. Even for technical matters, the discussions i have seen at > least on dev about Council decisions, have always been contentious and > veered off into non-technical aspects (which is probably why they're on the > Council agenda in the first place.) no. the point of the notice was that so people who were trying to get technical standards passed did not forget about the timeline of doing so. i'll see about duplicating the notice to -project though. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
