X-Original-To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org Received: from mx1.tetrasec.net (mx1.tetrasec.net [74.117.190.25]) by lists.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 303CCF8324D for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:36:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.tetrasec.net (mail.local [127.0.0.1]) by mx1.tetrasec.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DB689E1F12; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:36:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw (67.63.200.37.customer.cdi.no [37.200.63.67]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: alpine@tanael.org) by mx1.tetrasec.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D3FEC9E03E0; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 18:36:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 20:36:24 +0200 From: Natanael Copa To: Drew DeVault Cc: Ted Trask , alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] [PATCH 2/2] Rework the base team description Message-ID: <20190410203624.35719561@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> In-Reply-To: <20190409175838.GE21799@homura.localdomain> References: <20190409050210.20217-1-sir@cmpwn.com> <20190409050210.20217-3-sir@cmpwn.com> <20190409133140.GB21799@homura.localdomain> <6B5C3246-C8D8-4CE8-8A56-8ECBADE4654B@yahoo.com> <20190409175838.GE21799@homura.localdomain> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-alpine-linux-musl) X-Mailinglist: alpine-devel Precedence: list List-Id: Alpine Development List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:58:38 -0400 Drew DeVault wrote: > On 2019-04-09 1:55 PM, Ted Trask wrote: > > There is a big difference between sharing the workload and giving up > > authority. My main objection is to the stipulation that a base team > > member cannot be reelected immediately. Not only is ncopa sharing > > authority with two others for the first three years, he would be > > forced to give up all authority in the fourth year. Or am I reading it > > wrong? > > You're interpreting it correctly, though I assume ncopa will continue to > serve his roles in teams other than base during that time. I think that > you should trust ncopa to back a governance model he believes will work, > even if it means he has to take a break every few years. He is far from > uninvolved in these discussions, I suggest you trust his judgement in > this matter. I initially did not have strong opinion on the rotation model but the more I think about it the less I like it. > After all, if he doesn't want the authority then it's not > your place to force him to accept it. I have never said I want to resign. I would very much like to share it and I would very much be able to take a break if needed and leave it in trusted hands. I need to be prepared to give up authority if that ever will be needed. I must admit I am not very comfortable with the thought of being forced to completely giving up authority but I am open to discuss it and not completely against it. I will unlike sit and do nothing for a year so why would I want to get back to the Alpine drama instead of continue with the new thing I'm doing? -nc --- Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org Help: alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org ---