On Thursday 02 July 2009 10:54:05 Tobias Scherbaum wrote: > Ned Ludd wrote: > > The devs have a voice one time of the year: when it comes time to vote. > > But what about the rest of the year? What happens when the person you > > voted for sucks? You are mostly powerless to do anything other than be > > really vocal in what seems like a never ending battle. That needs to > > change. I'm not quite sure how. But I'd like to see the dev body have a > > year-round voice in the council. Either via quick votes year-round > > on topics or simply by having discussion in the channel. Devs should have > > a right to voice their concerns to the council and engage in interactive > > conversations without being labeled troll. > > I'm not sure about that, but we can easily give it a try. > > What I'd like to see for sure is a formal rule on who can decide to > modify or change parts of glep 39.
we already have a formal method: - change is proposed ahead of time like any other business for council to review (which means the community sees it) - council votes and assuming it passed - the dev/council lists are notified of changes (see previous summaries for example) - if there is still no problems, then the project page/GLEP is amended officially if the dev community has a problem, then it should have come up like any other issue along the way. if the only way to resolve the greater dev concerns is with a vote, then that is how it goes. needing a full community vote all the time is a huge time waste for absolutely no gain. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
