1 |
I originally tried to send this to list on the date and time listed |
2 |
below. Which was a day before some other negative events transpired. |
3 |
Turns out I was still banned from posting to all lists from events that |
4 |
transpired back in 2008. |
5 |
|
6 |
Very likely the other events have skewed others perceptions, but if all |
7 |
knew the background story of what I have been dealing with in the past |
8 |
year. Much less things that went on long ago. I think you can start to |
9 |
sympathize a bit with my point of view, if you put yourself in my shoes. |
10 |
|
11 |
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 16:37 -0500, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
12 |
> To begin with I have spent almost a year now trying by any means to |
13 |
> rejoin Gentoo which still has not happened. While most any developer I |
14 |
> have interacted with has been very supportive of such and encouraging my |
15 |
> return. When it comes to Gentoo Recruiters, I have received only the |
16 |
> opposite. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> Recruiting alone, along with the process of handling returning devs, has |
19 |
> made it near impossible for me to rejoin. Even worse recruiting has |
20 |
> driven me away a few times in the process. Which recruiting should never |
21 |
> be responsible for making a new developer or returning developer want to |
22 |
> quit or give up on the process. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> After completing my quizzes and waiting for three months last year, I |
25 |
> gave up. At the time I was told by the lead recruiter, Petteri Räty, |
26 |
> that there was a 20 person back log/queue for recruiters. Which I find |
27 |
> that some what unacceptable, but I now know the real reason for the |
28 |
> delay. Time is being wasted in the process and things being drug out |
29 |
> much longer than they need to be. Which I recently experienced first |
30 |
> hand yesterday. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> I accepted the back log/queue reason at the time, which has turned out |
33 |
> to be an excuse. Despite being in regular communication with Petteri. |
34 |
> Not to mention being in #gentoo-java a few times when there was a |
35 |
> schedule team meeting an no one showed. I was around, and that time/hour |
36 |
> could have been spent re-processing me and getting me back on board. |
37 |
> However that was not the case. |
38 |
> |
39 |
> Since then the queue has gone away. But the new reason, or excuse that I |
40 |
> get from Petteri is conflict of interest. He is Java Team lead, a team I |
41 |
> will likely join, but many of my contributions have nothing to do with |
42 |
> Java. Thus he felt a recruiter should not be on the same team or project |
43 |
> as a new developer. |
44 |
> |
45 |
> I do not believe that is documented policy, and if it was would be |
46 |
> incorrect logic. Sure its nice for a recruiter to have a neutral point |
47 |
> of view. However if a recruiter has exposure to a new/returning |
48 |
> developers activity. That will only give them greater knowledge as to |
49 |
> the other persons skill level. |
50 |
> |
51 |
> I basically figured given the resistance and those with the power to |
52 |
> process recruits being totally uncooperative. I had no choice by to give |
53 |
> up on the effort. At least that was something, which is better than |
54 |
> months of nothing. I did not want to wait for something that seemed it |
55 |
> was never going to take place, might as well just give up. Not like I |
56 |
> got any encouragement to be patient. |
57 |
> |
58 |
> Now as I was contributing things over the holidays, another dev I was |
59 |
> attempting to proxying stuff through, or reopened my developer bug. |
60 |
> Which I did not have a problem with. I would like to rejoin if there was |
61 |
> a reasonable way to do that without wasting a ton of time. It seemed |
62 |
> after which some progress was being made. Thomas Sachau was interacting |
63 |
> with me in #gentoo-java, and stepped up to do what Petteri basically |
64 |
> refuses to do, process me as a recruit. |
65 |
> |
66 |
> Which is some what funny, because to join the Java team, there is a |
67 |
> third quiz, beyond the two normal developers must take. The only |
68 |
> recruiter who can review a Java quiz is Petteri. Which speaking of the |
69 |
> Java Quiz there are several questions that are out of date. I brought |
70 |
> that up a few times, and was told I could/should go correct it as a |
71 |
> user. However today it was brought up in #gentoo-java by another who is |
72 |
> seeking to become a gentoo developer. Petteri responded I will go |
73 |
> correct the quizzes, which was not the same response given to me on |
74 |
> several occasions. |
75 |
> |
76 |
> Despite the resistance and all the rest. I kept focused and doing what |
77 |
> was necessary in order to get back on board. I was following up with |
78 |
> Thomas as to when we could set a time. When it got close to that, Thomas |
79 |
> started preaching to me about not getting myself into situations like |
80 |
> the past. Which I felt was uncalled for, and the past should be left |
81 |
> where it is. Now that comment brought about a slew of discussions that |
82 |
> Thomas did not like. Mostly because I dislike devrel, and both Petteri |
83 |
> and Thomas are part of devrel. If not directly then by association with |
84 |
> recruiters project falling under devrel. |
85 |
> |
86 |
> Finally yesterday I got to the point of quiz review. Which prior to |
87 |
> that, Thomas had made several comments about us not completing review in |
88 |
> one sessions. Which I mentioned to him several times, I did it in one |
89 |
> session before with my old recruiter,Bryan Ostergaard. At a time when I |
90 |
> was new, knew less, and had no experience. The second time around should |
91 |
> be much faster than the first, only a few questions changed on the |
92 |
> quizzes. But it seems Thomas had it set in his mind that it would take |
93 |
> more than one session. |
94 |
> |
95 |
> Unfortunately that was the case, and after spending 2hrs in review |
96 |
> yesterday with Thomas, we did not make it past 10b on the first quiz. |
97 |
> Which I find completely unacceptable. Now Thomas puts the delay solely |
98 |
> on me, accepting no blame or fault on his behalf, that I was complaining |
99 |
> through out the process. Which there were some complaints, but that was |
100 |
> not the reason for it taking 2hrs. We should have blown through the |
101 |
> first 10 questions on the first quiz, much less completed review of both |
102 |
> quizzes in 2hrs. |
103 |
> |
104 |
> Now i was trying to make the log of the session public by attaching it |
105 |
> to my developer bug. Not to give out quiz answers or to disrespect the |
106 |
> recruiting process as others might see things. Despite how recruiters |
107 |
> have disrespected me on several occasions. But to shed light on a major |
108 |
> problem. Also so others can form their own opinion as to why it took |
109 |
> 2hrs to cover 10 questions. Which were not the most complex questions of |
110 |
> the 3 quizzes that needed to be reviewed. |
111 |
> |
112 |
> On top of it all I am really amazed at how many bugs are open since I |
113 |
> left. Several bugs were open before I left and remain that way today. |
114 |
> Most any package I maintained is still without a maintainer, and I have |
115 |
> a huge mess to clean up and tons of work to do. All of which I would |
116 |
> have and should have done long ago. For past reasons I rather not bring |
117 |
> up again. |
118 |
> |
119 |
> One might think recruiting would take the amount of work that is not |
120 |
> getting done that I will get done into consideration. In discussions |
121 |
> with Thomas and Petteri I pointed out several times, that I was not |
122 |
> suffering from not being a Gentoo Developer. But in fact Gentoo has |
123 |
> suffered in many ways. Not only with more open bugs and no maintainer on |
124 |
> several packages I maintained. But in many other areas, no monthly |
125 |
> newsletter, no tax return for the foundation, no new recruits for the |
126 |
> java team, etc. The list goes on and on. |
127 |
> |
128 |
> I do not feel recruiting is doing whats in Gentoo's own best interest to |
129 |
> get new or returning developers up and running as soon as possible, and |
130 |
> with the least amount of obstacles. I have no idea why Gentoo goes out |
131 |
> of its way to make things more difficult than they need to be. There is |
132 |
> not enough time for all things that need to be done to get done across |
133 |
> the board. The only way for that ever to change is with increasing the |
134 |
> amount of people and simplifying the process, complexity and delays are |
135 |
> not beneficial. |
136 |
> |
137 |
> However some feel that its best to have less people that are capable of |
138 |
> more. While thats a valid argument, it doesn't hold much water. If that |
139 |
> were true, Gentoo would not be behind in any way. Nor would Gentoo need |
140 |
> or have any benefit for new developers, since everything that needs to |
141 |
> be done is getting done or done. Till that is the case, Gentoo needs to |
142 |
> focus on amount of developers, quantity over quality. Ever day there are |
143 |
> more FOSS projects and applications, only way for Gentoo to keep up is |
144 |
> with numbers. |
145 |
> |
146 |
> For the time being I will not provide any logs or links to facts that |
147 |
> re-enforce my comments. I am doing such out of respect for other |
148 |
> developers wishes and the community as a whole, for now. However I feel |
149 |
> at some point that stuff will have to be exposed to truly shed light on |
150 |
> the matter. |
151 |
> |
152 |
> In the end a few should not hold back many like this. There are many |
153 |
> users suffering, things that need to be done, and recruiting, a few |
154 |
> Gentoo Developers are standing in the way of this. Thus I question any |
155 |
> harm that might result from making private sensitive information public. |
156 |
> Given the harm others are doing thats going some what unnoticed, but |
157 |
> surely visible and felt by users. Gentoo is suffering either way. I |
158 |
> would rather get it all out there now, hit rock bottom sooner than |
159 |
> later, and get back to making things better. |
160 |
> |
161 |
> The current status quo is not acceptable, IMHO. |
162 |
> |
163 |
|
164 |
|
165 |
-- |
166 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
167 |
Obsidian-Studios, Inc. |
168 |
http://www.obsidian-studios.com |
169 |
|
170 |
This message (including any attachments) contains confidential |
171 |
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is |
172 |
protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should |
173 |
delete this message. |
174 |
|
175 |
Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking |
176 |
of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. |