User:MGorny/Council elections 2018

This page collects extensive information about nominees in 2018 Council election.

	amynka	b-man	dilfridge	k_f	leio	rich0	slyfox	soap	tamiko	ulm	whissi	williamh
Manifesto			manifesto		manifesto		manifesto		manifesto		manifesto	manifesto
Dev since	2014-07 (4 yrs)	2015-02 (3 yrs)	2010-09 (8 yrs)	2014-07 (4 yrs)	2006-08 (12 yrs)	2007-12 (10.5 yrs)	2010-06 (8 yrs)	2016-01 (2.5 yrs)	2014-10 (3.5 yrs)	2007-04 (11 yrs)	2016-08 (2 yrs)	2004-04 (14 yrs)
Council? [source]	never	never	since 2013 (5 terms)	since 2015 (3 terms)	2009-10 (1.5 term)	2013-17 (4 terms)	in 2017 (1 term)	never	in 2017 (1 term)	since 2009 except 2010 (8.1 terms)	never	since 2012 (6 terms)
Trustee? [source]	never	never	never	never	never	2011-13 (1 term)	never	never	never	never	never	never
ComRel? [ source ]	no	no	lead	member	no	no	no	no	no	no	no	no
QA? [ source ]	lead	no	no	no	no	no	no	member	no	member	no	member
Other notable teams	proxy-maint, recruiters, science	proxy-maint, security	base-sys, pr, toolchain	pr, proxy-maint, security	gnome, arm64, mips	systemd	toolchain, exotic arches ;-)	github, proxy-maint, science	proxy-maint, science, systemd, toolchain	devmanual, emacs, licenses, pms	base-sys, security, x86	accessibility, base-sys, openrc, systemd, toolchain
Answers to questions from gentoo-project
	amynka	b-man	dilfridge	k_f	leio	rich0	slyfox	soap	tamiko	ulm	whissi	williamh
Roles of Council and Trustees [src]		Council: technical direction; Trustees: legal and financial responsibility; dissolve Foundation in favor of umbrella org [src]	Council elected by developers should be the single steering body of Gentoo; eventual transition from Foundation to umbrella org [src]	Trustees: make sure the bills are paid and affairs are in order; Council: handles the distribution [src]					Council: developer community, user base and all technical development decisions; Trustees: assets and support, carrying out requests from the developer community [src]	Trustees: financial assets, trademarks, possibly copyright; Council: everything else [src]	same as bman and k_f; prefer SPI but will respect the preference of the majority [src]	Trustees: protect the trademark, logo, copyrights, provide financial services; Council: cross-project technical decisions, handle disciplinary/qa appeals [src]
Lack of manpower [src]		efforts from developers; e.g. easy contribution via GitHub, marketing at events [src]	fostering and enabling cooperation [src]	improve reputation and visibility [src]					streamlining the contribution process, maintaining special occasion releases, automation [src]		not Council's job; it's responsibility of every single member of the Gentoo community [src]
Unified vision of Gentoo [src]		passionate developers are sign of health; Council&dist should set clear goals [src]		differences are good if they can be discussed in a fruitful way; Council exists to solve disagreements [src]					meta-distribution allows for diverse agendas, existing mechanisms work fine [src]		fine as long as projects don't conflict; if they do, they need to arrange with each other; QA/Council should not abuse their power to pull the project against majority [src]
	amynka	b-man	dilfridge	k_f	leio	rich0	slyfox	soap	tamiko	ulm	whissi	williamh
Follow community requests or own judgment [src]		always represent developers even if he disagrees with them; civil discourse is important [src]	listen to developers, be familiar with daily affairs and make decision based on that [src]	once elected the duty of the individual is to what is perceived as the best of the organization, despite any short term noise [src]	own judgment with research and consideration of other opinions, for same reasons as k_f [src]				follow community consensus [src]	he would not vote against developer consensus; in case of an unresolved controversy vote based on own judgment [src]	in the perfect world we all agree; if we don't agree, Council member should follow the majority [src]	things are not clear-cut; need to decide which way is better on case-by-case basis [src]
Proactive or reactive Council [src]		Council should remain proactive and ensure developers can do their work unobstructed [src]	proactive council that takes responsibility for all aspects of Gentoo [src]	individual council members are doing this already, by being involved in the various projects [src]	proactive council members, reactive council as a whole [src]				developers should be the ones making decisions, so the Council should be careful with autonomous decisions if necessary [src]	impossible to distinguish between Council and Council members acting as individuals [src]	passive and avoid involvement unless explicitly requested [src]	most of the time, intervene only on request of developers [src]
Community veto/dissolution power [src]		There should be a defined path to removal; it should be done smartly and no room for malice or ill intent [src]	supports my/tamiko's GR proposal [src]	yearly elections serve that purpose, not sure if additional complexity is worthwhile [src]	there is yearly elections and overturn potential (but OK with high limits); general voting possibility good, e.g. to help council decide on important cases purely based on opinion decisions [src]				yes [src]	he would not oppose a system similar to Debian's general resolution if it has reasonably high thresholds [src]	only if the community is looking for a committee which will decide for them [src]	they can already change GLEP 39 at any point; not opposed to general resolution [src]
	amynka	b-man	dilfridge	k_f	leio	rich0	slyfox	soap	tamiko	ulm	whissi	williamh
gentoo-dev posting restrictions [src]		TL;DR: the decision was tough but reasonable; we can implement different techniques in the future [src]	trying to solve the problem is better than hoping it would go away; things can be changed when a better solution is found [src]	it's consistent with other aspects of Gentoo, e.g. editbugs on Bugzilla; the original intention of -dev was to be even more restricted [src]	probably against but needs more pondering; hopeful for a different solution but should stay restricted until it's in place [src]				necessary to stop abuse; can be reopened once moderation is in place [src]			100% against [src]
position of Gentoo in Linux ecosystem [src]		adaptability, configurability, and community; we excel at servers [src]	infinite adaptibility, cutting edge testing w/ solid stable, wide arch support, ideal for software developers [src]	for power users; focus on flexibility and performance, stable runtime and upgrade path [src]	for power users, decision makers and people who want to learn how things work; sometimes too often forcing choice; meta-distribution for other projects [src]				one of the source-based distros; customization; fine and knowledgeable user base [src]			most customizable distro out there; power user distro [src]
	amynka	b-man	dilfridge	k_f	leio	rich0	slyfox	soap	tamiko	ulm	whissi	williamh
Use of GitHub [src]		supports use as mirror and a familiar and easy way to contribute [src]			supports being where contributors are; we do not have to rely on it and handle people who don't use it well; gitlab might be interesting as replacement for everything but purely for merge requests it's not worth the effort [src]				good for reaching to wider audience; should not be used for issue tracking; projects should be encouraged to use git.g.o [src]			not opposed if used as optional mirror that brings more developers [src]
Own use cases for Gentoo [src]		server+laptops (all amd64) [src]			everywhere but phones (~amd64, arm64, arm, mips) [src]
Improvements for Gentoo experience [src]		start enforcing standards, e.g. GLEP 63; security [src]			ability to choose to leave a choice to the maintainer; faster/better package manager; more OS innovation from Gentoo [src]