| 1 |
On Tuesday 15 July 2003 09:01, Martin Gramatke wrote: |
| 2 |
> While Gentoo is actually blessed with highly respectable managers, I have |
| 3 |
> absolutely no idea what the future will be if some of them change their |
| 4 |
> life plans, e.g. get headhunted by MS ;-) |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> So I would really appreciate a more democratic structure in Gentoos's |
| 7 |
> management and I think Debian is a nice antetype. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Not necessarily the users have to participate in such a voting system and |
| 10 |
> you really don't have to vote about technical issues which should be |
| 11 |
> decided by managers within their area of accountability. But at least the |
| 12 |
> managers should elect their own circle, role by role and temporal limited. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
This is exactly what happens. These internal elections are closed to protect |
| 15 |
the privacy of the people concidered, and to allow for open discussion. Be |
| 16 |
assured though that it's not just Daniel deciding everything. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Gentoo now has a good base to start such a restructuring. With respect to |
| 19 |
> the notable efforts of individually managers in the past, I fully |
| 20 |
> understand if they want to keep their good influence on Gentoo. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> But a democratic structure would give me a much better feeling concerning |
| 23 |
> the long term availability and stability of Gentoo. This would wipe off my |
| 24 |
> last doubt if Gentoo is my distribution for at least the next twenty years. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
In general gentoo is very democratic. Most decisions are debated through for |
| 28 |
extensive times on -core and #gentoo-dev. What is lacking is the fact that |
| 29 |
too often there is no one to say, "ok, this is what we agreed upon. If there |
| 30 |
are no new objections, implementors go ahead". |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Paul |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 36 |
Researcher |
| 37 |
Mail: pauldv@××××××.nl |
| 38 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives