-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 08/05/2011 02:35 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Markos Chandras <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> How much Gentoo differs from 2007?
> I think this is the wrong question - simply being different means
> nothing. Gnome 3 is different, nobody will argue with that.
> In what way should we more be different from what we were in 2007
> than we are today?
> Still, I'd say that our mailing lists are less flame-prone,
The last flame was in May with all the ChangeLog mess. Not that far away.
> system is more modern, we now have regularly-updated install media,
> and we have more cooperation with alternate configurations (other
> PMs, prefix, etc).
Good point except that these are accomplishes of sub-projects ( openrc,
releng, pms and prefix ) and have nothing to do with how Gentoo is
governed. It wouldn't make any difference if Gentoo had a single leader
or a Council with 20 members. Those project would have still
accomplished their goals. What about global project issues though? ( see
Gentoo as a governance model is still the same, meaning it is far too
complex, too much time is consumed on mailing lists leading to dead
ends, and global project directions or improvements are introduced
slowly. Some global project issues that should have been resolved years
* slacking arches
* dead projects with hundreds of open bugs
* singed manifests etc
I vividly remember that the previous council tried to resolve the
slacking arches issue. Of course there was no decision. So if we try to
bring this again to the agenda, we need to recycle the whole discussion
that was done then, get our MLs busy for a couple of weeks, and
hopefully we will have a solution by January 2012.
I am sorry, but this is not what I call "flexible governance model"
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----