-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 08/05/2011 05:32 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 08/05/11 15:54, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
>> On 08/05/2011 02:44 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>>> On 05-08-2011 14:17:29 +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>>> I am still not convinced that a committee of 7 people is
>>>> flexible enough to push radical changes.
>>> Perhaps I misunderstand you here, but I don't think making
>>> radical changes is good, that's what 7 people balance out.
>>> Radical changes have been made to important parts of Gentoo like
>>> e.g. Python, and this didn't really result in a major
>>> improvement, IMO.
>> My point is how fast and how flexible can a committee like this
>> decide on global project issues
> If you have a good idea and carry it forward you can expect it to be
> ratified within the next council meeting - so with deadlines for
> discussion items etc. about 6 weeks turnaround time in the worst
This is very optimistic.
> But... for that YOU have to move things forward. Demanding that
> council makes other people do things is not how Gentoo works. So if
> you think slacking arches are a problem ... aquire a Mips or Sparc or
> whatever machine and get cracking.
Right, exactly what I am saying. A single developer has to put his
effort to push things forward. Last time I remember something similar
was when Ben (yngwin) tried to introduce changes and he was "forced" to
retirement. Awesome. You know very well that if a single person tries on
his own to change things, he will lose motivation sooner or later.
You know, another solution for slacking arches is to drop the stable
keywords. OFC this is too scary and it wont make us look good :). This
problem in particular exists before I even become a developer. Everyone
complains, yet nothing changes :). And the solution is pretty obvious:
"If you can't maintain a stable tree, then don't have one"
>> Right nobody came with a proper solution yet the problems still
>> exists. The same problem will probably pop up again in the future,
>> recycling the previous discussion and go back to sleep again.
>> Someone has to decide and vote for the least worst solution before
>> the problem goes back to hibernation, otherwise you are back to
>> square 0. This is no progress
> Actionism won't help. If you don't even have a solution either the
> problem is well defined, very hard to solve or not the right problem
> to fix (see the whole "let's find a problem so that systemd is a
> solution" insanity that just won't walk away and leave us alone)
Maybe but pretending there is no problem is not good either. Keep
talking and try to come up with a solution. After all, most of us ( if
not everyone ) are engineers, programmers etc, sysadmins. We can't
really say "Eh, sorry, too hard for me, I'll skip it"
> And again, if you don't want it to go to sleep work on it, find
> others that want to work on it, radiate on relevant communication
> channels (blog, mailing lists, ...) that you work on it. Don't expect
> others to do things for you.
That is true.
> I'm quite happy with the current state, there's lots of users
> helping with issues if you ask,
That could be better. We definitely need more communication channels
with users and bugzilla is a bottleneck. But this discussion does not
> there's usually a few devs that give at least moral support, and
> things move as fast as I can keep them moving. What's the problem
> with that? :)
There is no problem, I am just saying things could definitely be better.
Again this does not belong here
What I gathered from your e-mail is that Council is there to just vote
for issues that other devs brought to the agenda. This is a bit pathetic
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----