On Tuesday 02 October 2007, Steve Long wrote:
> Agreed, as it leaves Gentoo without a Council for a month, and you could
> end up with no consistency at all viz date of elections. Stating that the
> officials must be selected before the nomination process can be started,
> and that the same deadlin
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon,
01 Oct 2007 17:38:01 -0700:
> The next person is only accepted if the entire remaining Council
> unanimously accepts the person. This really is there to allow a
> rejection to keep us from going "in the red"
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>> On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 21:54 +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>>> 1. Due to the tardiness in the election process, there was no council
>>> meeting in September. Will this cou
On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 22:12 +, Duncan wrote:
> I had thought the resign/leave/whatever procedure was well laid out --
> the person next in elective order (the one that "just missed", so to
> speak) got the spot. There had been some debate as to a cutoff, since
> (assuming a reasonably large
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the
> 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> irc.freenode.net) !
As in the past these threads have been usually less-than-technical, i wonder
if they should be done on -project?
--
"Chrissy Fullam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon, 01 Oct
2007 07:33:54 -0700:
> Flameeyes did send an email, that vapier resent for those who didn't get
> it, where flameeyes agreed that jokey would be his proxy while he
> focused on getting better and gettin
