List Archive: gentoo-project
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
George Prowse wrote:
> Steve Long wrote:
>> drobbins' offer left a nasty taste in my mouth: one week, all his own
>> appointees, no information (beyond: "expect big changes"), no discussion.
>> Er, no thanks?
>> Maybe that's cos he's frustrated and doesn't want to waste time; it's
>> just not the kind of ultimatum I personally would ever accept. And since
>> we haven't had a Foundation since last summer, I really don't see the
>> need to be bullied into accepting.
> I'd never heard about his offer until I got the previous email through
> and it seems very drastic and extremely unlikely that anyone will give
> it the time of day.
Exactly: it's too drastic and sudden; all-or-nothing, now-or-never.
> I dont see what would really change though, Gentoo needs a president
> type and he seems like the only logical candidate.
Does it? Seems to me like there are a few Napoleons around ;-) I'd still
love it if he were back on-board ofc, but I really don't understand why
anyone would want to cave in to these demands. Grow a pair, ffs!
> I also can't see why people would be worried about taking up his offer,
> I mean I can't see anything radical that would different apart from the
> management structure and that would result in some developers losing
> their ability to exert control over various parts.
Well technically the Foundation used to be legal title-holder to all Gentoo
assets. He's talking about the Trustees exerting control over the
developers, which is something it was explicity set up not to do; the
Council are the ultimate authority for all developers. So in a sense he's
trying to take control over the whole thing (even though it would be a new
legally disjoint entity) in one swoop. Some people will applaud that,
others not. *shrug*
The SFC thing is far more like the old Foundation tbh. Only they have
professional admins, accountants and lawyers. ;)
> At the very least I would only consider his offer when I had some sort
> of information on the offer. Negotiations are whats needed, not an
> instant accept/decline
Yeah, only he explicitly rules out any negotiation and set a very tight
deadline to accept or refuse. I pleaded with him to change only the terms
(no discussion/deadline and all his appointees) believe it or not. meh.
"Railroading" is the only term that seems apt to me.
email@example.com mailing list