1 |
Dominik Riva wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> On Jan 15, 2008 2:15 PM, Wulf C. Krueger <philantrop@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> Please explain why I should care about the Gentoo Foundation in your |
6 |
>> opinion. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Maybe because it is a the part of Gentoo was designed to holds Gentoo's |
9 |
> assets? Things like the logo, servers, name, ... oh and don't forget the |
10 |
> money - all rather unimportant things, right? |
11 |
> |
12 |
Well I for one would like the option of never reincorporating to be |
13 |
discussed. The only thing that would matter is the trademark/brand. Infra |
14 |
seems to be owned by others in any case, people and organisations who use |
15 |
Gentoo as part of their work and thus have a vested interest in it |
16 |
continuing. |
17 |
|
18 |
>> > I can understand that this angers the community and drobbins, as it |
19 |
>> > angers me too. |
20 |
>> |
21 |
>> I don't. I *do* care about our users, about my ebuilds and the |
22 |
>> technical side of things. I do *not* care about a foundation that's |
23 |
>> supposed to be an IP container. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> Why do you not care about the assets of Gentoo? |
26 |
> |
27 |
As I said I don't think there's anything significant besides the trademark. |
28 |
That's hardly been used to make any sort of money. |
29 |
|
30 |
>> > But I think that some drastic actions must be taken, |
31 |
>> |
32 |
>> Why? To appease the mob? What horrible, catastrophic thing has |
33 |
>> happened? Please explain that. I honestly don't see it. |
34 |
>> |
35 |
>> > maybe exactly because the bandwagon with the angry mob on it. |
36 |
>> |
37 |
>> Drastic measures because some people loudly claim the end of the world |
38 |
>> is coming? No, thank you. |
39 |
> |
40 |
> This is all about politics and it is a shame the developers have to |
41 |
> care at all about it. |
42 |
> It is about opinions, actions, the missing actions and there consequences. |
43 |
> |
44 |
I haven't seen any consequences since the Foundation lapsed last summer. |
45 |
|
46 |
As for opinions those appear to have been stirred up by Mr Robbins in a |
47 |
political move to gain control of everyone's work and copyright. Attesting |
48 |
motivation for that is speculation. |
49 |
|
50 |
> And even worst it is about what could happen if. Some thing that you |
51 |
> can NOT code, test and trow away if it leads to some outcome that is |
52 |
> bad, ugly, catastrophic - it is to late by then. |
53 |
> |
54 |
Yeah, like what? We haven't had a Foundation for months and nothing bad has |
55 |
happened. |
56 |
|
57 |
>> >> The ebuilds keep coming, we're basically doing "business" as usual and |
58 |
>> >> that should be enough, I'd say. |
59 |
>> > Sure, all is fine in the land of Gentoo - problems are for people that |
60 |
>> > have nothing better to do :( |
61 |
>> |
62 |
>> Name those problem, please. I'll gladly try to address them if I can. |
63 |
> |
64 |
> That is exactly why I started the wiki page - to name the problems, |
65 |
> give info about them and even give you a head start by offering some |
66 |
> possible fixes. |
67 |
> |
68 |
It'd be more persuasive if you specify them here to back up your argument. |
69 |
I've openly stated that I think user involvement and conduct on the dev m-l |
70 |
are the biggest problems I see. Users used to feel just as excluded when |
71 |
drobbins was in charge, and Gentoo was not some mythically easy thing to |
72 |
run back in those days. It's a hell of a lot easier to maintain now. |
73 |
|
74 |
As for the dev m-l, let's see how the Council's new team manages. I don't |
75 |
think they need a BDFL to sort that out, just some political will to |
76 |
enforce the CoC. OFC I believe this should be as transparent and impartial |
77 |
as possible, but I'm sure anyone who feels they haven't been dealt with |
78 |
fairly will blog or post to the forums about it. |
79 |
|
80 |
For the record: I'd still like drobbins involved, but I don't think his |
81 |
terms were at all reasonable, and the way he went about it was |
82 |
reprehensible imo. It was designed to cause the furore it did, and only |
83 |
makes me give credence to the argument that much of the negative press on |
84 |
distrowatch has come from an associate of his. It was a totally political |
85 |
move, and not at all motivated by concern for Gentoo afaic. If he cared |
86 |
that much, he'd have approached Mr Goodyear privately or on the nfp list if |
87 |
he wanted to be "open". Not put everyone through all this stress. |
88 |
|
89 |
|
90 |
-- |
91 |
gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list |