Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-project] Re: A proposal to get out of this mess
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 09:56:03
Message-Id: fmhvul$ai0$1@ger.gmane.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] A proposal to get out of this mess by George Prowse
1 George Prowse wrote:
2
3 > Dominik Riva wrote:
4 >> This organisation is not able to do any thing then producing code at the
5 >> moment and this is what produced that mess.
6 >>
7 Agreed; coders are useless at organisation and administration of anything
8 but software. That's how it's supposed to be.
9
10 >> The offer from drobbins and the community that wants you by a big 90% to
11 >> take him by his offer.
12 >>
13 >> The developers that don't like his offer because of his style to handle
14 >> volunteers that don't share his point of view.
15 >>
16 >>
17 Well whatever their reasons might be, we're not the ones who would have to
18 work under drobbins, are we? And for all the talk of this only being about
19 the organisational side, the Trustees were/would be the legal owners of
20 Gentoo, if Gentoo went back to that form of incorporation. drobbins has
21 made it clear he wants to institute changes on the developmental side, from
22 his position as President/Chair of Trustees.
23
24 So that's a pretty major change in terms of the structure: the Trustees
25 would be deciding development policy.
26
27 >> So what to do:
28 >>
29 >> Decline his offer!
30 >>
31 >> Forget the Foundation - it is as dead as it can get legal. (how long can
32 >> Gentoo wait till the assets get lost?)
33 >>
34 Well I don't know much about it ofc, but I don't think they do own many
35 physical assets or money. AFAIK most of the infra (especially network
36 connectivity) isn't owned by Gentoo. I'm sure there are several machines
37 (most likely donated to Gentoo) given rack-space at eg osuosl.org. Domains,
38 brand and IP appear the most significant assets, and the last is debatable
39 given the lapse of the legal entity.
40
41 Since there hasn't been a Foundation in all this time, my bet is the
42 copyright on the code reverted to the authors a while back. Anyone who felt
43 s/he donated their code to the whole Community could quite justifiably
44 protest at it going into the control of an individual; after all since
45 drobbins left, it has been a NFP Foundation they assigned copyright to.
46 That no longer exists.
47
48 US law is not the only law in the world, either; I am told that in Germany
49 you can't even assign copyright, only grant a usage license. I am not a
50 lawyer, nor do I assume drobbins is out for any nefarious purpose: I'm
51 simply pointing out that if the devs don't all agree to this, there could
52 be a hell of a situation to deal with which really could lead to the demise
53 of Gentoo. All because it had to be done in a week with no discussion?
54
55 >> Let the community vote on a constitution for the council. (One from the
56 >> developers and as much others that have a substancial backing from the
57 >> community. In Switzerland we normally can vote for 2 to 3 versions of a
58 >> "hot iron" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendum#Switzerland)
59 >>
60 OK I think we're mixing terminology here, which could get confusing: there
61 already is a Council, and it's the ultimate decision-making body on
62 technical matters. drobbins is proposing to take over the Board of
63 Trustees, which doesn't technically exist so he'd be starting a new
64 Foundation only he wants all the devs to hand their work over to that, and
65 accept him as ultimate authority.
66
67 >> A new council of 5 persons gets voted that stands under the rules of the
68 >> new Gentoo constitution by the community at large.
69 >> (Yes they will vote drobbins in if the likes to accept his nomination in
70 >> the light of the new rules)
71 >>
72 Er no, drobbins has insisted that the entire Board would *all* be his
73 appointees, and Gentoo would have *no* say in the matter.
74
75 >>
76 >> Why I think this drastic steps are needed:
77 >>
78 >> Gentleman, you screwed big time and the community is pissed!
79 >>
80 >> The Gentoo-Project at large lost a lot of trust and credit in the eyes
81 >> of the community.
82 >>
83 Maybe you're right; personally they haven't in my eyes, mainly cos I've seen
84 how much crap they've had to deal with in the last few months on the m-l.
85 There's also been the small matter of a release which they've been working
86 towards, as well as getting the new Gnome stable (which seems to have real
87 issues, esp wrt policykit.) Then again, I don't much care about legal stuff
88 so long as it is done; the fact that it hasn't is bad. No doubt about it.
89
90 All it says to me is: hurry tf up and join the SFC:
91 http://conservancy.softwarefreedom.org/
92 http://conservancy.softwarefreedom.org/members/
93 ..seems like good company to keep in my eyes, and Gentoo can take itself
94 out of the SFC whenever it likes. That's vastly different to handing the
95 lot over to an individual, whoever that might be.
96
97 With an individual in charge, you have a single point of failure. Stress
98 builds up on that person and they turn more and more to their inner-circle,
99 who will reassure them in the face of "adversaries". The same thing happens
100 with small cliques. It's not healthy for any organisation, leave alone one
101 as large and semi-autonomous as the Gentoo dev community.
102
103 IOW moving backwards to a BDFL model isn't opening anything up, and isn't a
104 progression. Having drobbins as say, head of devrel or the like, /would/
105 make a difference imo. He'd be in the position to act on the issues he sees
106 with how devs treat users (I mean the "advanced" users they interact with
107 on a more frequent basis who do come under devrel) as well as inter-dev
108 bitchiness. Those two groups are the ones who get involved in flames on the
109 m-l. It would give him much more chance to set the tone for Gentoo
110 developers, and I believe he would be firm and fair, and act on those
111 problems in a timely manner to nip them in the bud (once the initial
112 firefighting had been done ;)
113
114 This is not a criticism of current devrel. As I quoted in my forum post:
115 "Strong leaders are good: strong institutions are better. A strong community
116 is best of all."
117
118 >> Hell, I would not even trust a Gentoo-Foundation trustee to feed my pet
119 >> snails while I am on a vacation!
120 >>
121 Fair enough.
122
123 >> One last thing in my own interest:
124 >>
125 >> Please fill in the gaps at http://gentoo-wiki.com/Problems_at_Gentoo
126 >> with your internal knowledge.
127 So what's going to be on that page in a year's time? And why can't people
128 get this information from the quite long posts in the forum threads?
129
130 I see it as a temporary internal Community matter, and there's more than
131 enough info on the forums. Apart from your "own interest" (whatever that
132 is) whom does it really serve?
133
134 >> The community needs all information's it can get if it has to vote. This
135 >> geeks want to know that what they do to there beloved distribution is
136 >> the right thing to do.
137 >>
138 You're assuming the users get a vote: they don't and personally I'm not at
139 all fussed about it. It's not my code, and it's not me who'd have to work
140 under the new regime.
141
142 Not saying I'd have any problem with it: I like what drobbins tried to do
143 last year (stand up to a monstrous troll) and obviously I love the distro
144 he created, as well as the user community which he inspired. I just don't
145 have the right to make that decision for someone else, and nor imo do you.
146
147 > I like the idea of a discussion of this kind and I applaud you for
148 > trying to start a discussion but you are unlikely to start any form of
149 > discussion here because it is not the forum for it.
150 >
151 I disagree: it's absolutely the right forum, since it's a non-technical/
152 organisational issue that concerns all interested parties. Exactly the kind
153 of thing project was set up for.
154
155 You may be right that it won't change anything however; this is one of the
156 rare occasions (it's the only one I can actually think of tbh ;) where i'm
157 siding with the devs against the users (since the discussion is framed
158 along those lines), in that it's their choice to decide how and with whom
159 they want to work.
160
161 drobbins' offer left a nasty taste in my mouth: one week, all his own
162 appointees, no information (beyond: "expect big changes"), no discussion.
163
164 Er, no thanks?
165
166 Maybe that's cos he's frustrated and doesn't want to waste time; it's just
167 not the kind of ultimatum I personally would ever accept. And since we
168 haven't had a Foundation since last summer, I really don't see the need to
169 be bullied into accepting.
170
171 The software is still improving, and the herds are still feeding ebuilds
172 into the main tree. I just did a fresh install from 2007.0 and
173 *GENTOO STILL ROCKS!*
174
175
176 --
177 gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A proposal to get out of this mess George Prowse <cokehabit@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A proposal to get out of this mess Dominik Riva <slalomsk8er@×××××.com>