1 |
On Jan 15, 2008 11:02 AM, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
2 |
> George Prowse wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > Dominik Riva wrote: |
5 |
|
6 |
> >> Let the community vote on a constitution for the council. (One from the |
7 |
> >> developers and as much others that have a substancial backing from the |
8 |
> >> community. In Switzerland we normally can vote for 2 to 3 versions of a |
9 |
> >> "hot iron" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendum#Switzerland) |
10 |
> >> |
11 |
> OK I think we're mixing terminology here, which could get confusing: there |
12 |
> already is a Council, and it's the ultimate decision-making body on |
13 |
> technical matters. |
14 |
|
15 |
I was referring to exactly that Council. I would like to see it |
16 |
rebuild stronger then ever by being voted by the community at large |
17 |
(including developers). |
18 |
But it will in its new incarnation handling all matters Gentoo, that |
19 |
needs a decision made by some sort of a lead. |
20 |
|
21 |
> >> A new council of 5 persons gets voted that stands under the rules of the |
22 |
> >> new Gentoo constitution by the community at large. |
23 |
> >> (Yes they will vote drobbins in if the likes to accept his nomination in |
24 |
> >> the light of the new rules) |
25 |
> >> |
26 |
> Er no, drobbins has insisted that the entire Board would *all* be his |
27 |
> appointees, and Gentoo would have *no* say in the matter. |
28 |
|
29 |
drobbins would have no say as Gentoo declined politely his offer. |
30 |
|
31 |
> All it says to me is: hurry tf up and join the SFC: |
32 |
> http://conservancy.softwarefreedom.org/ |
33 |
> http://conservancy.softwarefreedom.org/members/ |
34 |
> ..seems like good company to keep in my eyes, and Gentoo can take itself |
35 |
> out of the SFC whenever it likes. |
36 |
|
37 |
>From all I know about the SFC, I welcome this step. |
38 |
|
39 |
> With an individual in charge, you have a single point of failure. Stress |
40 |
> builds up on that person and they turn more and more to their inner-circle, |
41 |
> who will reassure them in the face of "adversaries". The same thing happens |
42 |
> with small cliques. It's not healthy for any organisation, leave alone one |
43 |
> as large and semi-autonomous as the Gentoo dev community. |
44 |
> |
45 |
> IOW moving backwards to a BDFL model isn't opening anything up, and isn't a |
46 |
> progression. |
47 |
|
48 |
That is why I would like to see the Council do the job. |
49 |
|
50 |
> >> One last thing in my own interest: |
51 |
> >> |
52 |
> >> Please fill in the gaps at http://gentoo-wiki.com/Problems_at_Gentoo |
53 |
> >> with your internal knowledge. |
54 |
> So what's going to be on that page in a year's time? And why can't people |
55 |
> get this information from the quite long posts in the forum threads? |
56 |
|
57 |
I hope some some new problems are on that page in a year. |
58 |
Because the forum posts and topics are quite long and the information |
59 |
is all over the place and even most of it is in the mailing lists. |
60 |
|
61 |
> I see it as a temporary internal Community matter, and there's more than |
62 |
> enough info on the forums. Apart from your "own interest" (whatever that |
63 |
> is) whom does it really serve? |
64 |
|
65 |
I like to give Gentoo a tool to measure what in the eyes of community |
66 |
needs to be done at large - where the shoe is pressing if you will. |
67 |
And It addresses not only this matter. I hope I can move this problem |
68 |
soon to a sister page with the title "Past Problems at Gentoo" |
69 |
and mark the solution that was taken. |
70 |
|
71 |
> >> The community needs all information's it can get if it has to vote. This |
72 |
> >> geeks want to know that what they do to there beloved distribution is |
73 |
> >> the right thing to do. |
74 |
> >> |
75 |
> You're assuming the users get a vote: they don't and personally I'm not at |
76 |
> all fussed about it. It's not my code, and it's not me who'd have to work |
77 |
> under the new regime. |
78 |
|
79 |
Rebuilding a leadership by voting is a common way of rebuilding lost |
80 |
trust and gives the community the feeling it is not ignored. |
81 |
|
82 |
You don't care enough about Gentoo to vote? |
83 |
|
84 |
> You may be right that it won't change anything however; this is one of the |
85 |
> rare occasions (it's the only one I can actually think of tbh ;) where i'm |
86 |
> siding with the devs against the users (since the discussion is framed |
87 |
> along those lines), in that it's their choice to decide how and with whom |
88 |
> they want to work. |
89 |
> |
90 |
> drobbins' offer left a nasty taste in my mouth: one week, all his own |
91 |
> appointees, no information (beyond: "expect big changes"), no discussion. |
92 |
> |
93 |
> Er, no thanks? |
94 |
|
95 |
I can understand drobbin's ultimatum but I too don't like the taste of it. |
96 |
|
97 |
> The software is still improving, and the herds are still feeding ebuilds |
98 |
> into the main tree. I just did a fresh install from 2007.0 and |
99 |
> *GENTOO STILL ROCKS!* |
100 |
|
101 |
But for how long if some big problems don't get addressed because they |
102 |
are not technical by nature? |
103 |
|
104 |
|
105 |
Regards, Dominik Riva |
106 |
-- |
107 |
gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list |