Re: Defining GNOME software (finally)

[Sriram Ramkrishna <sri ramkrishna me>]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 8:48 AM Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro gnome org> wrote:
>

> > You should also know that becoming a committee will involve some small
> > changes [3]:
> >
> >   - You'll need to have membership changes ratified by the board
> >   - You'll need to have a chair, and minuted meetings
> >   - You'll need to keep the board informed about how things are going
>
> Having membership changes ratified seems fairly low cost. We normally
> hold one formal meeting per year, which we take private notes on, so
> the only change there would be to make those minutes formal and public.
> Most of our decision-making occurs on IRC, and not as part of any
> formally organized meeting, and therefore is not minuted. Then keeping
> the board informed about goings-on also sounds low cost. So this all
> sounds fine to me. If anyone wants to object, please do so now.

I think if you're making decisions that aren't recorded then how does
that get communicated to the board if there are no formalisms?
Granted, I think most of those decisions that are made on irc are
fairly pedestrian and is not particularly worth nothing - but without
some formalism you have no framework on what is of interest and what
isn't, no?

Regarding "what is GNOME?" - this always ended up being more political
in the past because invariable people are interested in the branding
as being core means that we have a different set of expectations.

Changes made to the buildstream configs - is there a process there
given that it could be political?

sri