Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 1:27 AM, Ciaran McCreesh > <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:20:09 +0530 >> Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbh...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> Allowing him to proxy in a council meeting is both disallowed >>> (non-gentoo devs cannot be on the council) >> Please point to the rule that says that a non-developer cannot be on >> the Council, and please point to the rule that says that a Council >> member cannot appoint a non-developer as their proxy. I see no mention >> of either in GLEP 39, which only restricts voting of Council members to >> developers, and only restricts proxies to not having one person with >> multiple votes. >> > > Oh so you'll argue semantics now? The spirit of the rule is > excessively clear. No non-gentoo-developer can be a member of council > -- permanent, temporary, or proxy. > > If a council member can't find a gentoo developer to be their proxy, > that says a lot about the council member. > > In any case, discussing this with you is completely m00t given my past > experiences with discussions with you. > > > -- > ~Nirbheek Chauhan >
Actually, please read GLEP 39 and you will see that it doesn't restrict council members to developers only. Basically under the current rules I think it's technically right to be proxied by anyone. If you don't think being proxied by non developers is wise, don't vote for those council members next time. If we want to restrict the council to developers only, we should think about modifying GLEP 39 (which should be done via a vote among developers as that's they way 39 was agreed upon). Regards, Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
