1 |
Warwick Bruce Chapman wrote: |
2 |
> There is a plethora of potential Gentoo developers out there and this |
3 |
> sort of press does nothing for getting them any closer to joining the |
4 |
> effort. |
5 |
I consider myself a "potential Gentoo developer", although as I stated |
6 |
in my first post I simply don't have the time. I'd have to stop doing |
7 |
something else I love to do this. Most of the packages I'm interested in |
8 |
are very well maintained anyhow. In any event, the Distrowatch article |
9 |
did not change either my perception of the quality of Gentoo or rule out |
10 |
me volunteering as a developer. What it did do is prompt me to reply to |
11 |
the DistroWatch message board, as I often do. And I said essentially |
12 |
what I've said here -- I am still a Gentoo loyalist and I haven't seen a |
13 |
decrease in the day-to-day quality of Gentoo for *any* reason. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Secondly, regarding the DW article, surely if it was as baseless as |
16 |
> many members of this list suggest, and I am not referring to the |
17 |
> specific references in the article, but to the underlying reasons the |
18 |
> author may have decided to write it, then DW should have immediately |
19 |
> been corrected on the issue and made to publish a retraction. I am |
20 |
> not sure this is the case and, while I am only a user and casual |
21 |
> contributor, I have become more and more aware of the grumblings and |
22 |
> (perceived?) increase in turnover of developers. |
23 |
It isn't just DistroWatch any more. I'm here because there was an |
24 |
announcement on the Gentoo front page that a code of conduct was being |
25 |
discussed on the mailing list. Hell, there was even a mailto link to |
26 |
subscribe! As I mentioned in a previous post, perhaps someone could find |
27 |
out just how gentoo.org ranks in web page hit statistics compared to |
28 |
Debian, Fedora, openSuSE and Ubuntu. So -- Gentoo's home page -- the |
29 |
marketing face of the distro to the world -- invites one and all to join |
30 |
a discussion on a code of conduct, and most of us, even "advanced" |
31 |
users, have no idea of the context. That's both good and bad. It's good |
32 |
-- very good, IMHO -- because it shows that the community is open to |
33 |
feedback and is willing to announce that. And it's bad because you don't |
34 |
in general want negativity on your front page. |
35 |
> |
36 |
> Thus, with all respect due to current and past developers, could I |
37 |
> suggest that regardless of whether or not the DW article is worth |
38 |
> consideration, the process of adopting the Communication CoC and the |
39 |
> structures required to implement it be followed through in the best |
40 |
> interests of all developers and users of the Gentoo project. |
41 |
+1, as they say on other lists, with the proviso that the discussion |
42 |
continue until all have been heard. Processes like this take as long as |
43 |
they take. |
44 |
|
45 |
-- |
46 |
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P) |
47 |
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/ |
48 |
|
49 |
If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given rabbits fire. |
50 |
|
51 |
-- |
52 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |