1 |
Richard Brown wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> This was the first of many nominations for the incumbent council that |
4 |
> gave no reason as to why they should be voted for in this election, as |
5 |
> several of them have accepted their nominations with no further |
6 |
> qualification, and flameeyes seems to think himself above having to |
7 |
> justify why he should be elected, so I provide, for your |
8 |
> entertainment, the following blog posts: |
9 |
> |
10 |
> A Council of Successes: An attempt to analyze what the incumbent |
11 |
> council have achieved during their tenure. |
12 |
> http://arbearohooooen.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/a-council-of-successes/ |
13 |
> |
14 |
|
15 |
Moving this to -project since it doesn't really belong on -dev (well, |
16 |
none of this does other than for the instructions to post nominations on |
17 |
-dev). |
18 |
|
19 |
Would I personally be happier if the council had done a little more that |
20 |
was solid - maybe. |
21 |
|
22 |
Do I think that they basically got nothing done at all - no. |
23 |
|
24 |
Here's my thinking: This is a volunteer-based distro. Such |
25 |
organizations are not best run by issuing edicts from the castle, but by |
26 |
influencing and building consensus. Many of the issues that were |
27 |
brought to council were resolved on their own by discussion on -dev/etc. |
28 |
For example, the whole slacker archs issue was probably brought up in |
29 |
reference to mips (although it isn't fair to single them out, I'll still |
30 |
use them as an example. In part due to the discussion, mips decided to |
31 |
revert to a non-stable arch, which helped alleviate the problem. |
32 |
|
33 |
My feeling is that problems getting solved without direct council |
34 |
involvement is a GOOD thing. Now, maybe there are a few things that |
35 |
would benefit from a little more involvement. I'd really like to see |
36 |
PMS continue to gain more official backing as it matures (although this |
37 |
has had some progress). |
38 |
|
39 |
Also - many of the issues that have gone slowly aren't really technical |
40 |
in nature, but rather are policy-oriented. This certainly is within the |
41 |
council's domain, but not necessarily what they have focused on in their |
42 |
developer careers with gentoo. I've noted that they've been very |
43 |
accepting of ideas discussed on the lists, and that is a good place for |
44 |
them to be in. |
45 |
|
46 |
My feeling is that maybe the council could have done more, but on the |
47 |
other hand I'd rather not see them issuing huge policy changes on a |
48 |
monthly basis. Gentoo has room to improve but it isn't a distro in need |
49 |
of over-arching changes to be successful. |
50 |
|
51 |
Here is a thought - maybe the council would be more active if we only |
52 |
put half the slots up for election every other year. I think part of |
53 |
the problem is that with the council starting off new every year it |
54 |
takes some time for them to get a sense for their actual power. 1/6th |
55 |
of their meetings are either their first meeting or their last meeting - |
56 |
which aren't going to be big get-stuff-done meetings. |
57 |
-- |
58 |
gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list |