Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo part II.

[Spider]

begin  quote
On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 21:46:21 -0400
John Davis <zhen@g.o> wrote:

> Good evening all:

Not as good as it could have been.  You dropped a bomb here in the idle
summer idyll of our list. And there's a lot of people who reacted to it.
 As expected I think.

I won't go through doing point-to-point rebuttals to your suggestions
here, frankly because I don't have the clarity of mind to do so in a
well thought out way.

Constitution..  We should protect our users, for what?  erm?

perhaps some limits on the management team, that they should not use
their management position or be in a management position if they have an
ulterior goal other than Gentoo? 

(We need to port this to f00-arch now! since I'll earn money off it in
private... *Evil glimmer of eyes and small portrouding horns out of
$NEW_MANAGERS head.)


Voting, Just who'm would be voting? So far all I've see as proposals
about voiting have been a developer (or a few) with an idea, and along
with the vote goes a technical debate, so iun turn itslike the
discussion of a RFC where you either agree or disagree, but also
-comment- in a useful way.
To take this and separate it further into blown-out global-dev votes
would remove a lot of that good discussion, frankly I -want- the
opinions of other developers (hey, they are technically inclined, and I
trust them to to either shut up or find out more if they think they
aren't.).  Instead it would risk falling down to the lovely anonymous
feeling of foo voted Bar, at which turn we'd loose another asset.
Discussion.


Wether the momentum that is needed to make it happen exists or not, is
another thing. Some such ideas might be hard to do but necessary, and in
that case I trust the -management-  to bring it up and space it out to
developers tehy think are capable of doing it.  And if failing to do so,
do it t hemselves.  :-)

Terms for managers?  Well, there are terms. until they grow tired, until
the people they manage go tired (I expect it to happen sometime.  There
will be a small set of rumblings on irc about a manager thats hard to
get hold of, then a note will be sent to the list. "Could you managers
kick $MANAGER in the ass and make him around more?" .  At this point I'd
expect management to be self-managing enough to either kick (and perhaps
kick hard)  or replace said $MANAGER.

Structuring it further and implying more limits will force even more of
the bothers of politics around, and frankly. Can you people show me a
democracy that works?  No, not in theory, in practice...
(don't reply to this last statement, if you do you fall into the
flame-trap)


Meeting procedure.  Ergh.  Frankly, as I've seen it they have managed
surprisingly well. Not all meetings -need- to be strict and formal after
the rule-set dictated by your local church. (point one, apply meeting
leader. point two assign secretary. point three, assign....   Whereby
the meeting starts after 20-30 minutes with the 9th post on the list
which is to read through last weeks protocol and jury it  as valid or
not.  SHeeesh.)

Frankly, I think they do it well. Let them keep doing it in a way they
are comfortable with.  its more important (for me) that developers are
comfortable than that they follow procedure. (remember, managers are
also developers.  perhaps not in life, but this is  better. ;-)


Regards, 
   Spider

-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end