On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 04:29:57AM -0400, Chandler Wise wrote:
> At the moment, I would argue the IDEC (or whatever it will be named) to
> just codify the procedures once gets the procedures (and name) sorted out.
> At the very least a codification of procedures can act as an interim
> document, in order to remove and potential confusion, issues, and to make
> it less opaque.
>
> For the eventual Constitution and final document, I would urge that this
> not be completed in haste and that time is taken on such a document. While
> I will note that such a discussion does not seem to be heading down that
> avenue, at the same time I think it may be a useful reminder to have. So
> for a final document perhaps a rather important question to ask, and answer
> is how close do we want to be to Debian with a governance structure? While
> this may have been repeated, and may seem silly, such a question can
> ultimately depend on how it might be best to proceed, at least in my
> opinion.

The role of a distro is to put out releases. If there are no releases,
the distro does not exist, and there is no need for a
governance. Let's get ascii out, and beowulf synced with buster, and
then we can discuss of governance.

Beautiful documents are those, do not misinterpret me. But it looks to
me like discussing of how to spend a million pound without having yet
won the lottery...

My2Cents

KatolaZ

-- 
[ ~.,_  Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - GLUGCT -- Freaknet Medialab  ]  
[     "+.  katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it  ]
[       @)   http://kalos.mine.nu ---  Devuan GNU + Linux User  ]
[     @@)  http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia --  GPG: 0B5F062F  ] 
[ (@@@)  Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ  ]