[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46D2A113.2030403@sgi.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:01:55 +0200
From: Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Tech Board Discuss
<Tech-board-discuss@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Isaacson <adi@...apodia.org>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>, ksummit-2007-discuss@...nk.org
Subject: Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation
Technical Advisory Board Elections
Alan Cox wrote:
>> although I would worry about their members only being the ones voting on
>> the TAB for no other reason than the bias toward one distro only at this
>> point in time.
>
> Given the complaint was about the question of correct selection of voters
> replacing the somewhat flawed kernel summit attendee test with a
> completely bogus SPI membership one seems silly.
But replacing the flawed KS list with one based on actual contributors,
from the git logs as I proposed last week, doesn't seem silly.
Right now it looks like we have a list of sane candidates up, which I
certainly would be willing to vote for. However, it would be a shame
that the credibility of the election is lost because of sticking to an
undemocratic voting procedure. A procedure which it in fact was stated
when the board was created last year, would be replaced this year.
So, yes, I support Willy's motion of having it moved away from KS. I am
less excited about SPI, but even that would be better than KS.
Jes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists