Dominik Riva wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2008 2:15 PM, Wulf C. Krueger <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Please explain why I should care about the Gentoo Foundation in your
> Maybe because it is a the part of Gentoo was designed to holds Gentoo's
> assets? Things like the logo, servers, name, ... oh and don't forget the
> money - all rather unimportant things, right?
Well I for one would like the option of never reincorporating to be
discussed. The only thing that would matter is the trademark/brand. Infra
seems to be owned by others in any case, people and organisations who use
Gentoo as part of their work and thus have a vested interest in it
>> > I can understand that this angers the community and drobbins, as it
>> > angers me too.
>> I don't. I *do* care about our users, about my ebuilds and the
>> technical side of things. I do *not* care about a foundation that's
>> supposed to be an IP container.
> Why do you not care about the assets of Gentoo?
As I said I don't think there's anything significant besides the trademark.
That's hardly been used to make any sort of money.
>> > But I think that some drastic actions must be taken,
>> Why? To appease the mob? What horrible, catastrophic thing has
>> happened? Please explain that. I honestly don't see it.
>> > maybe exactly because the bandwagon with the angry mob on it.
>> Drastic measures because some people loudly claim the end of the world
>> is coming? No, thank you.
> This is all about politics and it is a shame the developers have to
> care at all about it.
> It is about opinions, actions, the missing actions and there consequences.
I haven't seen any consequences since the Foundation lapsed last summer.
As for opinions those appear to have been stirred up by Mr Robbins in a
political move to gain control of everyone's work and copyright. Attesting
motivation for that is speculation.
> And even worst it is about what could happen if. Some thing that you
> can NOT code, test and trow away if it leads to some outcome that is
> bad, ugly, catastrophic - it is to late by then.
Yeah, like what? We haven't had a Foundation for months and nothing bad has
>> >> The ebuilds keep coming, we're basically doing "business" as usual and
>> >> that should be enough, I'd say.
>> > Sure, all is fine in the land of Gentoo - problems are for people that
>> > have nothing better to do :(
>> Name those problem, please. I'll gladly try to address them if I can.
> That is exactly why I started the wiki page - to name the problems,
> give info about them and even give you a head start by offering some
> possible fixes.
It'd be more persuasive if you specify them here to back up your argument.
I've openly stated that I think user involvement and conduct on the dev m-l
are the biggest problems I see. Users used to feel just as excluded when
drobbins was in charge, and Gentoo was not some mythically easy thing to
run back in those days. It's a hell of a lot easier to maintain now.
As for the dev m-l, let's see how the Council's new team manages. I don't
think they need a BDFL to sort that out, just some political will to
enforce the CoC. OFC I believe this should be as transparent and impartial
as possible, but I'm sure anyone who feels they haven't been dealt with
fairly will blog or post to the forums about it.
For the record: I'd still like drobbins involved, but I don't think his
terms were at all reasonable, and the way he went about it was
reprehensible imo. It was designed to cause the furore it did, and only
makes me give credence to the argument that much of the negative press on
distrowatch has come from an associate of his. It was a totally political
move, and not at all motivated by concern for Gentoo afaic. If he cared
that much, he'd have approached Mr Goodyear privately or on the nfp list if
he wanted to be "open". Not put everyone through all this stress.
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list