Hi,
Le 2019-12-09 à 18:19, Martin Michlmayr a écrit :
* Bdale Garbee <bd...@gag.com> [2019-12-09 15:59]:
It's not clear to me why you need to rescind the resolution instead of
just continuing to not actually appoint or seek advice from existing
appointees. What's the problem you're actually trying to solve?
Make sure reality is reflected.
The annual report lists the advisors, but they haven't been consulted
in years, so imho it makes sense to reflect that.
I find it quite natural in a mostly open project like this one that
advisors are not explicitly consulted. I would not infer from a presence
in such an SPI advisor list that a person is explicitly consulted.
It also creates
more balance between projects (why is the Debian project leader always
an advisor?)
I do not see balance between projects (whatever that means) as a goal.
Nor would I consider gender imbalance as a problem per se. To discuss
genders, the problem I could see is a lack of feminine presence. But I
expelling productive males would be a costly solution to that, if it can
be one.
I never heard about advisor creating any kind of imbalance (though I
must say I was also unaware of their existence).
That being said, I have no strong opinion on this, though if we don't
publish a list of current advisors, as seems to be the case, I would
tend to support abolition.
[...]
--
Filipus Klutiero
http://www.philippecloutier.com
_______________________________________________
Spi-general mailing list
Spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org
http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
