Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (253 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
[opensuse-project] Re: Board elections
- From: Pascal Bleser <pascal.bleser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 23:34:17 +0100
- Message-id: <47CF1FE9.5000407@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Alberto Passalacqua wrote:
Again, as several people have replied already: it's
* 4 elected
* 1 appointed by Novell (chair)
The differentiation between Novell and non-Novell for the 4 elected
board members is only to try to guarantee a certain degree of independence.
The appointed chair position is not up to discussion, we won't change that.
You could have 4 elected board members who are all Novell employees and
drive the board to the best interests of the community and another board
with 4 non-Novell employees that ends up being useless or going against
the community.
It's a matter of trust in individuals. Whether they work for Novell or
not isn't all that relevant wrt that.
Personally, I'm rather under the impression we should have two lists, as
the goal is clear and immutable (we _won't_ change the board composition
rules, they're in the Guiding Principles): 2 NVL and 2 non-NVL.
The NVL list is _not_ made by NVL. It will be a list composed of people
who are members of the openSUSE community and want to be members of the
board for the best of the community at large. The individuals who will
be on that list are volunteering for it, they're not appointed by their
employer to be on the list. They just happen to work for NVL, and they
should clearly state that in their application, but it isn't the most
important criterion for voting or not, at least IMHO. There are many
much more important aspects.
.. their work time _and_ their free time for quite a lot of them.
Again, we shouldn't make distinctions between Nvl and non-Nvl people,
we're one community and most of the actions we are undertaking are
precisely to break that barrier (membership and board).
The 2 + 2 rule is just there as a safeguard and to lessen paranoia ;)
I don't see that happening either. Remember it's Novell who proposed and
wanted the board. And the board only has consultative powers (at least
as of now, I have no idea whether that will change in the future), hence
there isn't all that much that the board could do in terms of damaging
Novell -- except not representing the best interests of the community.
+1
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser <pascal.bleser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
/\\ http://opensuse.org -- I took the green pill
_\_v FOSDEM::23+24 Feb 2008, Brussels, http://fosdem.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHzx/pr3NMWliFcXcRAj62AKCLbSHlgxNpemkKzh6RuwvE7sJmNgCcD4LZ
sVZ1zq41vz/BatmbcGNX/fw=
=I941
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Hash: SHA1
Alberto Passalacqua wrote:
Il giorno mer, 05/03/2008 alle 18.36 +0100, jdd ha scritto:
Magnus Boman a écrit :
Novell does not chose 3 members. They will decide the '5th' member.
Anyone working for Novell, and contributing to openSUSE should be
allowed to put their hands up to be on the board. But it is up to
Novell employees and non-Novell employees to vote for them to actually
get the spot.
this is unusefull world, sorry.
Can a Novell employee vote against his employer? to be fired?
so there will always be 3 novell and 2 non-novell
I don't mean at all novell employees are not good persons, but nobody
can have two hats...
Again, as several people have replied already: it's
* 4 elected
* 1 appointed by Novell (chair)
The differentiation between Novell and non-Novell for the 4 elected
board members is only to try to guarantee a certain degree of independence.
The appointed chair position is not up to discussion, we won't change that.
You could have 4 elected board members who are all Novell employees and
drive the board to the best interests of the community and another board
with 4 non-Novell employees that ends up being useless or going against
the community.
It's a matter of trust in individuals. Whether they work for Novell or
not isn't all that relevant wrt that.
Personally, I'm rather under the impression we should have two lists, as
the goal is clear and immutable (we _won't_ change the board composition
rules, they're in the Guiding Principles): 2 NVL and 2 non-NVL.
The NVL list is _not_ made by NVL. It will be a list composed of people
who are members of the openSUSE community and want to be members of the
board for the best of the community at large. The individuals who will
be on that list are volunteering for it, they're not appointed by their
employer to be on the list. They just happen to work for NVL, and they
should clearly state that in their application, but it isn't the most
important criterion for voting or not, at least IMHO. There are many
much more important aspects.
I wonder why and with what purpose you are trying to put a negative[...]
accent on the fact that there are three Novell employees in the board (2
elected by the community).
1. This point is NOT under discussion in this thread and it's not
what Pascal asked to us.
3. The Novell employees you'll vote are the same guys who work on
the distribution, fix the bugs you report and already take the
decisions which influence openSUSE, investing in the project a
lot of time if not all their work time. I don't really see the
.. their work time _and_ their free time for quite a lot of them.
Again, we shouldn't make distinctions between Nvl and non-Nvl people,
we're one community and most of the actions we are undertaking are
precisely to break that barrier (membership and board).
The 2 + 2 rule is just there as a safeguard and to lessen paranoia ;)
point in thinking they'll act against the community interest,
because they are actually a part of it. About the risk they're
fired for voting against a Novell decision, well, I don't think
that's possible, considering Novell is authorising the board and
in any case, it would cause a huge damage to Novell's image
causing a big loss in the community trust and participation,
which is not what they want.
I don't see that happening either. Remember it's Novell who proposed and
wanted the board. And the board only has consultative powers (at least
as of now, I have no idea whether that will change in the future), hence
there isn't all that much that the board could do in terms of damaging
Novell -- except not representing the best interests of the community.
4. As in all things, the trust must be reciprocal. They need to
trust us and we need to trust them. I think they started in the
right way, with the idea of the board and of giving us the
possibility to vote. So please, don't see negative aspects where
there aren't that many.
+1
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser <pascal.bleser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
/\\ http://opensuse.org -- I took the green pill
_\_v FOSDEM::23+24 Feb 2008, Brussels, http://fosdem.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHzx/pr3NMWliFcXcRAj62AKCLbSHlgxNpemkKzh6RuwvE7sJmNgCcD4LZ
sVZ1zq41vz/BatmbcGNX/fw=
=I941
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |