Re: Initial slate

Martin Baulig <> writes:
> I think rather than putting together a list of people
> who should form the initial slate we should try to
> make up our mind about which projects/functions/etc.
> should be represented on the board.

Note that we are going to vote on the initial slate, so we don't have
to decide on one per se, though the discussion you've started is good
(we do need to nominate some slates!).
> So let me propose the following as initial slate:
> a) a strong advocate of Free Software [Miguel]
> b) the release coordinator(s) of the next GNOME release
>    (counting as one person) [Jacob,Maciej]

Most people will be on the board during two or three or more releases,
and ideally we won't have the same coordinators for all releases.

> c) at least three "core GNOME hackers" [...]
> d) someone who was very active on this list and has shown
>    regular interest in the foundation [...]
> e) someone representing the documentation project [...]
> f) someone representing the translation project [...]
> g) someone representing the "user's side" [...]
>    (ie. someone who's familar with the wishes of users)
> h) someone from Europe [...]
>    (and who's familar with marketing, shows etc. there)
> This makes 10 people (effectively 11 due to b)).
> Now let's add some more constraints:
> i)   at least 2 people from Helix Code, but at most 3
> ii)  at least 2 people from Eazel
> iii) at least 2 people from Red Hat
> iv)  at most  1 person from another company
> v)   at lesat 2 people without corporate affiliation

Someone from Sun would be good I think; they've contributed all the
StarOffice code and look to be major players in GNOME Office. I think
the steering committee would like to recommend that someone from Sun
be on the board (though we haven't voted on that recommendation or
anything, just my impression).
> Let's think about this and when we all agree about a)-h) at
> least for the initial slate, we can start filling up the
> remaining square brackets with people.

Your a)-h) look pretty good to me (except b)), it's going to be hard
to meet all the criteria though!


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]