Open Stack

On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> wrote:
>
> If we did, instead, as you suggest and prevent individuals from
> companies with paid-for seats from running, we wind up with a massive
> problem. We would wind up with a board of directors filled purely by
> people who are appointed by their companies combined with a set of
> people who come from a pool that is de facto restricted to be missing
> most of the active contributors of the project. Exactly how informed do
> you think the conversations of that board are going to be?
>

Either companies are appointing the most qualified people to their
paid seats, in which case folks like you don't need to worry about the
individual seats since you will be on the board, or they won't, in
which case you have the same question of uninformed board members,
except twice as many of them.

> I think that doing individual elections (likely to producing exciting
> people like Soren or mysql) first, and then filling the paid-for seats
> after with a total seat-cap per company seems like a good way to balance
> the interests of the project-as-open-source-entity and the companies
> funding elements of it.
>

Again, if you guys are the most qualified then your companies should
be appointing you to their paid seats.    One of the growing pains of
moving from a tightly-controlled project run by a company to an open
and inclusive one run by a foundation is accepting that there are no
longer any individual entitlements, regardless of contribution.


b