-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Aug 16, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Grobian wrote:
> Kito wrote:
>> On Aug 15, 2005, at 2:41 PM, Hasan Khalil wrote:
>> Sounds like a good idea.
> Arch testers are a good idea... It's pretty much work to compile
> packages and dive into them to test them in some decent way.
Great! We'll look into how the other archs run their AT's this
weekend. We'd really like to bring Mike (shootingstar) on board --
he's been a great help already.
>>> In terms of the elections for Gentoo for Mac OS X project leads
>>> that we discussed in previous threads, since there have been no
>>> other nominations, are there any objections to us taking the
>>> positions and getting to work on the points we mentioned in our
>>> candidacy e-mail? Please let us know one way or another.
>>> Alternatively, if anyone wants to throw in a last-minute
>>> candidacy pitch, please do so now! If no one objects or announces
>>> candidacy within a week, we'll make an announcement on -dev and
>>> change the project page as necessary.
>> Sounds like you guys are going to do this regardless, so why wait
>> a week?
We were hoping to give others a chance to announce candidacy. As per
my discussion on IRC with kito, if Fabian doesn't object, we will be
changing the election position to "Lead" and running as partners (co-
leads) rather than staying with the traditional strategic/operational
titles. We feel that the time commitment for the lead position would
be better met as a team due to our existing school and work
commitments. Kito suggested the name switch on the basis that the
"strategic" lead isn't going to be dictating long-term goals with a
project team as small as ours.
> 1) I think I missed the point why it was more suitable to wait,
> kito can you explain (again?)
My impression via our IRC conversation (and kito, please please
correct me if I'm wrong), is that kito wanted a senior gentoo
developer to take the project lead position. As we currently don't
have a senior gentoo developer with the project, he felt it would be
better to wait for one to come along.
Our counterpoint here is that we want a developer that is senior to
the Gentoo for Mac OS X (yes, we know -- name switch pending)
project, because having seniority among other developers is useless
if you don't know what to apply it towards. We need someone that's
been with the Gentoo for Mac OS X project long enough to know the
difficulties it faces and where it's come from. Things may seem
difficult now, but relative to a year ago, we're doing excellent.
> 2) Also with respect to the off-topic comment above; is it really
> necessary to drag both of you two into this position thing? In the
> end -- that's my impression -- your 'influence' is being controlled
> by the amount of work you do. So I'd care for activity, not for
> who is the real boss. gonj0n is an easy word here, but I don't
> really think that is necessary.
First of all, neither Hasan nor I feel comfortable committing to the
time requirement the lead position requires as a single individual.
We feel that as a team we would be able to fulfill that time
As for the need for the title, it is necessary for a variety of reasons:
1) Recruitment - we can bring new devs on, but making staffing
announcements has been a battle without the title. After much
convincing with devrel, I got them to put up a one sentence staffing
call for the project only because Pieter (pvdabeel) has been pretty
publicly absent with regards to Gentoo for Mac OS X.
2) Interproject relationships - There are a variety of things that
fall under here. The first is our need to have a coherent team. There
are a lot of people that are supposedly Gentoo for Mac OS X devs that
have been inactive for a long time, even after being contacted and
asked nicely to do something. We don't have the authority to do
anything about inactive developers because pvdabeel is the project
lead. Furthermore, this goes back to the recruiting nightmare. Why do
we need to recruit when we already have 10-12 devs? Additionally, in
order to be recognized as a "team" by the rest of Gentoo-dom, we
really need to display a unified face to the rest of the community.
We need a contact point. This isn't as severe as an issue as the
recruiting/staffing problems, but it is starting to become a problem
and that problem will only get worse. For instance, who does a
package maintainer go to when they happen to own a mac and would like
to do their own testing and keywording for the package they maintain?
They could ask any of us, but they would almost inevitably get
different answers, which just shows the rest of the community that
we're sloppy and unorganized. Now, if there was a lead that directed
conversations such as this with the rest of the community, collected
results and formed a set policy from this, that would look a whole
3) Public Relations: We not only need a unified face with the public
as well, but we also need to expand our PR in may ways. Documentation
and BugDay involvement come to mind first. As leads we have the
ability to speak for the rest of the team with the docs team and the
BugDay team. Without being lead, we can only speak for ourselves.
> 3) can you come up with a short recap on the proposed filled in
> functions and changes within the team, just so everyone (me) is
> sure we talk about the same things.
I'll recap the most important points. Please see our original e-mail
post for the details.
2) Documenting and initiating discussion on project policy
3) Address PR - BugDay, Updated Documentation, Project Page
There are other things that we talked about in our initial post, but
I have listed only the points that require the lead position title here.
Lina Pezzella && Hasan Khalil
Ebuild & Porting Co-Leads
Gentoo for OS X
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list