William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> 
> 	I would like to believe you have good intentions. Which would be nice
> to be able to discuss with you. But seems like you are avoiding any sort
> of direct communication possibly confrontations. Can you please start
> talking with us, and stop blogging at and about us. It's really adding
> an unnecessary layer of drama.
> 

Agreed.  I think a lot of developers are genuinely interested in 
Daniel's proposals and his ideas for trying to improve the distro. 
However, developers want to feel like they're being led in a common 
effort - not given orders.  As such Daniel's goal needs to be to develop 
a relationship with the developers, and not merely to seek to gain legal 
control over the foundation.

I'm not quite sure what he expects to happen if he has legal authority 
over the foundation and chooses to make a technical decision that does 
not have consensus.  Developers really can't be forced to obey, and it 
could lead to a real mess where you have the foundation threatening the 
distro with lawsuits over trademarks and copyrights and infrastructure 
developers revoking accounts as every little fief struggles for control.

Is the goal to make Gentoo a success?  Then let's start working together 
and let's stop trying to stir up publicity to try to force everybody to 
make decisions a certain way.

Daniel - take a look at the discussions on the various lists and see 
what the developers are saying, and react.  Maybe you'll win people 
over.  Maybe you won't.  Either way it is important to find out.  One 
way or another we will find out which it will be, and it is unlikely 
that a title like "Gentoo President" will make much difference in your 
effectiveness in leading the distro.  I think that a lot of devs would 
take your ideas seriously - but you need to trust them to be able to 
make their own decisions without coercion.  In a volunteer-driven 
organization it really can't work any other way.  You can't just have 
the developers finally agree on a GLEP and then have the foundation step 
in without bothering to participate and veto it.  Why would developers 
expect you to participate in the day-to-day operations as president when 
you don't participate on mailing lists as a candidate president?

If trying to convince developers of the rightness of your cause isn't 
worth your time, and you'd simply prefer to dictate a course, I suspect 
that not much will come of your offer.  Sure, it could be put to a vote, 
but I doubt that will turn out in favor of the role you desire.  And 
legally nothing can happen quickly - in order for a vote to occur there 
has to be notice/etc - this is a legal corporation and you can't just 
set up a forum poll to make a decision.

That is also a big boundary to involving users legally in the foundation 
- which ones get to vote and how do you identify them?  Does it come 
down to who can register the largest number of hotmail accounts?  Last 
time I checked postfix can handle a very large alias list...  :)  And is 
it in the interests of gentoo to potentially have its developers and 
foundation in conflict?  I think that in the very least we need to base 
voting on contribution - even if it isn't just developers.

Apologies for seeming to hit a couple of topics here in a 
somewhat-disorganized fashion...
-- 
gentoo-nfp@g.o mailing list