[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo part IIa.

[John Davis]

I am moving this discussion to -dev, where it ought to be...

> I think this is the crux of all our concern, all management and
> organisational decisions revolve around QA, among other primary concerns
> like architecture and so on.
>

Since quality should be the primary goal of any well run organization, I wholeheartedly agree.
 
> My opinion is that QA procedures can be created without forming a
> government of sorts, or creating a political landscape. There are
> development cultures which succesfully separate the issues surrounding
> architecture, financing and future directions within the distribution
> from the QA process, by placing it on the outskirts of 'governance', and
> I do think we would be wise to do the same.

Which is the issue that we are debating indirectly. I see a form of government, either lose or tight, as something Gentoo requires to grow. Other people may see differently. Of course, I am always open to compromise.

I am interested in the development cultures that you are speaking about. I assume that one of them is the Linux kernel team that you have described below? Could you elaborate more please?

> Debian may be stable, but Woody's sheer age really does indicate that
> something is wrong with their development model. I don't imagine
> suggesting a faster paced release model to their core developers would
> be met with much openness, nor would it be put to a vote. FreeBSD and
> RedHat, to name two, have live package build systems (ports/rawhide
> respectively) and cut a release from these every four months on the dot
> with impeccable QA. I don't think I could suggest such a thing to Debian
> developers without being laughed out of the discussion.
>

To a degree, I agree with you. Debian is very outdated in some respects. Again, what I do like about Debian is their upmost concern for QA (even if it is misplaced a bit), and their commitment to developer's rights. Gentoo should never, ever try to emulate Debian. We need to figure out our own policies, and Debian is a nice example to begin with.

> Another member of the previous thread mentioned the Linux kernel, if
> briefly. Look at how well it works in its development model. A core
> group of members make decisions as to where the kernel will be in 1, 5,
> 10 years, and the rest of the process looks, to the outside world,
> almost entirely haphazard. There is no need for constitutions or
> elections or a legal department, and yet Linux is thriving and growing
> at an extraordinary rate. And it has few enough QA problems that fortune
> 100 corporations use it!
>

Again, even though the kernel team is very successful, I am sure that they have some sort of vote tracking system, development policy (if just for the managers), etc. Additionally, creating a single software program, which the kernel is, and creating a distribution are two entirely different things. There are so many aspects that we have to concentrate on. The single greatest difference between the kernel team and ourselves is size. They can get away with lax management because their core team is so small. Additionally, does Gentoo even have a set team of people who plan for 5, 10, even 15 years down the road?

> It is my contention that the development culture *creates* the product.
> I believe Debian is what it is now because of the way it is managed, and
> Linux is what it is now because of the way *it* is managed.
>

Absolutely. Gentoo follows the same phenmenon.

> If I seem staunchly opposed to introducing Debian concepts to Gentoo,
> it's because I am. ;)
>

Me too. Like I said, I don't want Gentoo Debian Linux.

> My intention though, is not to attempt to close the discussion. If
> through the process an outcome can be reached which seems reasonable to
> all sides, all the better.
>

Absolutely!

Please do not think that I am attempting to make Gentoo Linux, Debian Linux. Both camps surely have their shortcomings. Gentoo is at a crossroads though, and we need to decide how we want to run the distribution. If we can find a balance between management structure and developer's freedom, then by all means, let's.

Regards,
//zhen

-- 
John Davis
Gentoo Linux Developer
<http://www.gentoo.org/~zhen>

----
Knowledge can be more terrible than ignorance if you're powerless to change your world.