Proposed resolution - rescind position of SPI board advisors
chealer at gmail.com
Tue Dec 10 01:12:04 UTC 2019
Le 2019-12-09 à 18:19, Martin Michlmayr a écrit :
> * Bdale Garbee <bdale at gag.com> [2019-12-09 15:59]:
>> It's not clear to me why you need to rescind the resolution instead of
>> just continuing to not actually appoint or seek advice from existing
>> appointees. What's the problem you're actually trying to solve?
> Make sure reality is reflected.
> The annual report lists the advisors, but they haven't been consulted
> in years, so imho it makes sense to reflect that.
I find it quite natural in a mostly open project like this one that
advisors are not explicitly consulted. I would not infer from a presence
in such an SPI advisor list that a person is explicitly consulted.
> It also creates
> more balance between projects (why is the Debian project leader always
> an advisor?)
I do not see balance between projects (whatever that means) as a goal.
Nor would I consider gender imbalance as a problem per se. To discuss
genders, the problem I could see is a lack of feminine presence. But I
expelling productive males would be a costly solution to that, if it can
I never heard about advisor creating any kind of imbalance (though I
must say I was also unaware of their existence).
That being said, I have no strong opinion on this, though if we don't
publish a list of current advisors, as seems to be the case, I would
tend to support abolition.
More information about the Spi-general