1 |
I just want to prefix this by saying that I was simply going to ignore |
2 |
your posts in this thread completely due to your obviously inflammatory |
3 |
nature at the beginning. Now that you're posting actual constructive |
4 |
criticisms, I'd like to respond. By the way, thank you for changing |
5 |
your tone to something more productive. |
6 |
|
7 |
On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 13:26 +0000, Peter wrote: |
8 |
> Having a democratic organization is great. Having a community-run distro |
9 |
> is great. However, it's a little utopian and unrealistic when situations |
10 |
> like this arise. You need a group to lay down the law and establish |
11 |
> control. Otherwise, you may find yourself in a situation where good people |
12 |
> with differing points of view just get fed up and leave the fold. That |
13 |
> would be a loss for everyone. |
14 |
|
15 |
This is something that most of the new council feels needs to be done. |
16 |
Gentoo has been run as an anarchy for far too long. The "leadership" |
17 |
has been pretty far removed from the day-to-day activities for some |
18 |
time. This isn't necessarily the fault of the people in power so much |
19 |
as the failing of all of us. Every single developer is responsible for |
20 |
the situation we now find ourselves in through our inaction and apathy. |
21 |
|
22 |
Let's stop this now and work towards cleaning up our house. |
23 |
|
24 |
> Similarly, you cannot allow certain individuals with little or no standing |
25 |
> to try and dictate what policy vis a vis a proposed project should be. |
26 |
> Otherwise, you end up in a real mess. |
27 |
|
28 |
Dictate, no. Suggest, absolutely. |
29 |
|
30 |
> When new ideas are proposed and developed, gentoo's leadership must be |
31 |
> involved from the beginning. This will head off these 100 thread |
32 |
> flamefests, allow project originators to know where they stand, and allow |
33 |
> those who disagree to know that there is authority. |
34 |
|
35 |
I agree, wholeheartedly. I think that some of the principles under |
36 |
which we are currently running are simply flawed. While putting |
37 |
unnecessary restrictions on projects is definitely not a way to |
38 |
innovate, having no controls, whatsoever, leads to complete anarchy. |
39 |
|
40 |
There are many contributing factors to these problems. This is nowhere |
41 |
near an exhaustive list, but a simple one from the top of my head. |
42 |
|
43 |
- The council is not involved in new projects. |
44 |
- New projects do not undergo a design phase to attempt to add sanity to |
45 |
them prior to their announcement/official status. |
46 |
- Projects do not communicate with each other. |
47 |
- Existing projects are not informed of possible parallels with new |
48 |
projects, resulting in duplication of work, hard feelings, and a lack of |
49 |
good resource utilization. |
50 |
- There are no ramifications against developers who do not follow the |
51 |
decisions made by the council. |
52 |
- The council, even after the recent change to allow meetings outside of |
53 |
the monthly schedule, is limited in its ability to make decisions in q |
54 |
quick and decisive manner. |
55 |
|
56 |
> You cannot allow things to get out of hand like they do. Everyone here |
57 |
> obviously wants to make gentoo better. However, NOT everyone has the right |
58 |
> to do so. NOT everyone has veto power or authority to approve. |
59 |
|
60 |
Correct. The council is nominated and voted on by the developers to |
61 |
represent them. This should give the council the power to do what is |
62 |
necessary to promote Gentoo and to improve Gentoo. |
63 |
|
64 |
> That's what's missing from this process. I think the council has been far |
65 |
> too quiet and policy far too vague which makes new ideas so difficult and |
66 |
> controversial. |
67 |
|
68 |
Agreed. However, the new council has only been official for 11 days, |
69 |
now. Some of us are just now getting the feel of what is involved, and |
70 |
we are discussing possible changes that need to take place. |
71 |
|
72 |
I propose that we start discussing more on #gentoo-council and come |
73 |
forth with some ideas for improvement by the 29th of September (1 week |
74 |
from now) to be brought up at the next meeting and voted upon. |
75 |
|
76 |
> You can't have a socialist model for a business. It simply does not work. |
77 |
> A union cannot run an auto company. You need leadership. Gentoo cannot be |
78 |
> run by 100 developers concurrently (yes, I know there are 300, but how |
79 |
> many of those are actually contributing?). There has to be a chain of |
80 |
> command. Otherwise, you are rudderless. |
81 |
|
82 |
This has been the problem with Gentoo since Daniel left, quite honestly. |
83 |
While things were far from perfect back then, the chain of command was |
84 |
much more defined. Currently, there is no chain, at all. |
85 |
|
86 |
Again, I thank you for the constructive ideas and hope that this spurs |
87 |
some discussion on how the council can act to improve Gentoo. |
88 |
|
89 |
-- |
90 |
Chris Gianelloni |
91 |
Release Engineering Strategic Lead |
92 |
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams |
93 |
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee |
94 |
Gentoo Foundation |