SPI resolution 2014-03-20.rtb.1 - Chakra as an associated project

H W Tovetjärn totte at tott.es
Wed Apr 9 17:40:09 UTC 2014

On Wednesday 09 Apr 2014 16:22:20 Ian Jackson wrote:
> Robert Brockway writes ("Re: SPI resolution 2014-03-20.rtb.1 - Chakra as an 
associated project"):
> > 4. H W Tovetjaern is recognised by SPI as the authoritative decision maker
> > and SPI liaison for Chakra.
> (As I have said before) the purpose of this part of the SPI project
> resolution template is to document SPI's understanding of the
> project's governance model.
> Is Chakra's governance model autocracy, then ?  I don't think that's
> the case.  The webserver is down but http://chakraos.org/wiki/ refers
> to "The Chakra Team" and
> http://chakraos.org/wiki/index.php?title=Frequently_Asked_Questions
> has a (sadly dead) link to something called the "core development
> team".
> I think we should stop using this phrase "authoritative decision
> maker".  It implies that the project is an autocracy, but not everyone
> is aware of that.  If the project is an autocracy we should say that.
> But most projects aren't.  Self-perpetuating oligarchies are much more
> common.
> How about we use one of the following templates:
>   | Foo Project's governance model is currently an autocracy,
>   | with Alice Jones in charge and Bob Kramer as deputy.
>   | 
>   | Foo Project's governance model is currently a self-perpetuating
>   | oligarchy.  At the time of writing the {core team | executive
>   | board | committers} are Alice Jones, Bob Kramer, Carol Liszt and
>   | Dave Macallan.
>   | 
>   | Foo Project's governance structure and current role-holders are
>   | documented on their web page at <URL> and <URL>, and will be
>   | honoured by SPI.
>   | 
>   | Foo Project does not currently have an agreed governance
>   | structure; in the unlikely and unfortunate event that SPI would
>   | have to decide between the wishes of competing factions, SPI would
>   | do so based on the merits.
> followed by in each case
>   | The initial SPI liason for Foo will be Eve Nieder.
> In this case I would defer to any comments from the Chakra project but
> I think the intent of the "core development team" probably that that
> team is a self-perpetuating oligarchy.
> I also think the drafts of these resolutions should be sent to some
> appropriate list belonging to the project, if there is one.  That way
> if the person drafting the resolution has misunderstood the project's
> governance structure (or there is a dispute) it can be straightened
> out.
> Thanks,
> Ian.
> _______________________________________________
> Spi-general mailing list
> Spi-general at lists.spi-inc.org
> http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general

Could "authoritative decision maker" be replaced with "arbiter"? If it doesn't 
cause a ruckus, I'd personally favour being viewed as an arbiter rather than a 
project leader.

For reference in this specific case, the current listing of contributors can 
be found at http://chakraos.org/home/?who. The URL is subject to change, but 
the intent is to provide a handful of "static" pages (i.e. not wiki articles) 
that only a select few can edit to maintain a degree of legitimacy to this 
kind of information. These pages will be linked to from the "frontpage", 
http://chakraos.org/home/, on which you currently find links to the page for 
downloading, a page about Chakra itself as well as the previously mentioned 
page covering contributors.

As for the "core development team" I'd personally suggest referring to it as 
"Chakra developers" or "Chakra contributors". There are those of us with what 
could be perceived as "voting rights" but it is very loosely defined and there 
are no established procedures for the process to becoming or remaining one. It 
is being worked on, but these things take time - and especially since Chakra 
has from a historical perspective more or less been owned and led by single 

We do have a mailing list for the administrators which is sort of a 
"collaborative inbox" to which a select few have access, chakra-
cabal at googlegroups.com. Anyone can send e-mail to it and my intent is to have 
everything sent to the standard e-mail addresses such as abuse at chakraos.org, 
webmaster at chakraos.org, postmaster at chakraos.org, info at chakraos.org, etc. (you 
get the idea) forwarded to it.

Oh and yes, everything previously found at chakra-project.org and chakra-
linux.org has been set up anew at chakraos.org. Unfortunately I can't do 
anything about the two lost domains.
Best regards,
H W "totte" Tovetjärn
totte at tott.es

More information about the Spi-general mailing list