On 2017-10-14 06:52, KatolaZ wrote:
> 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
>

No one is suggesting haste. Nor suggesting that drafting a document
become the focus of our precious time. The documents in question were
copied to the wiki in response to concerns brought up during the
Wednesday meets to make them more easily accessible. Those who have
attended meets regularly are well aware of this. If someone wants to
'improve' the documents, the wiki is a more accessible space than the
g.d.o. dungeon.

golinux