Governance??? A wake up call

[Scott Kitterman]

On Wednesday, November 19, 2014 19:56:56 Aveem Ashfaq wrote:
...
> "Create a sub-committee consisting of the most famous Kubuntu developer and
> someone from XFCE and a loose candidate from Unity. So, now Kubuntu
> community are happy about their place in the boards. They would like to
> make the seat more permanent and would be more active in contributions.
> Convert rivalry and friction into a competition of innovation. So, now the
> discussions are more volcanic and there is better brainstorming."
...

Speaking as a Kubuntu developer and Kubuntu Council member, I don't see a need 
for this.  There are some points of friction, but they are primarily technical 
over Qt5 maintenance details and how the future transition to Mir/Wayland will 
be handled.

We have ongoing discussions about this and while there are issues, we work 
through them.  If we ever have an issue that can't be resolved 
collaboratively, then if it's technical, the technical board is the right 
place to discuss it and if it's something else, the community council is the 
right place.  We've brought issues to both as needed.

The bigger problem I've seen is that sometimes the CC gets caught in the 
middle.  We brought some questions about Canonical claims that derivatives 
couldn't use Ubuntu binary packages without a license to the CC.  I don't 
think that anyone on the Kubuntu side of the question feels like we ever got a 
straight answer, but the problem wasn't with the CC.  They faithfully asked 
Canonical legal and got all the answers they could.  It just didn't amount to 
much in my opinion.

No amount of governance change will fix issues like that.  It's just going to 
happen sometimes. 

Scott K