Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo part III?

[Daniel Robbins]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 09:42:34AM -0400, John Davis wrote:
> First, I would like to thank all of those who have participated in this
> conversation, and lambaste those who have decided to start a flame war. In
> order for *anything* to get figured out, it is the latter that need time
> to discuss all avenues rationally.

I really haven't seen any flames. I don't think it's appropriate to label
those who happen to plainly disagree with you as flamers.

And since you are a Gentoo developer and represent this project, I'd ask
that you please stop taking this approach because I find it to be
disrespectful to our users. 

Your comment above is patronizing to our users who are simply trying to
share their opinions.

> So why would I propose something like this?

I think it's because a few days ago, you did not get a position within the
project that you wanted. Therefore, you have an axe to grind with the
management team. That's my personal theory. I don't think it's based on your
year of careful observation, as much as I'd like to believe it.

Some of your ideas might be OK if they are refined a bit more and their
scope is defined -- I am very much in agreement with Brandon Low's view --
which is identical to Kurt Lieber's view, from what I can tell.  We need to
improve in areas so we can grow and improve, but without crippling what
makes Gentoo "Gentoo."

However, your condescending attitude towards our users gives me the
impression that you are still a bit out of sorts over recent events, and may
not be the best person to spearhead this effort you are undertaking.

> Once again, I encourage you all to perpetuate this dialogue with open and
> intellectual posts. Flame bait and/ or flames do nothing but hinder the
> process of figuring out what needs to be done.

We already have a management team that is actively and swiftly getting
things done, as you know:

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/infrastructure/
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/releng/
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/alpha/
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gdp/
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/metastructure/
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/

Currently, new managers are elected by unanimous vote of the existing
managers. I am sorry you are upset that you were not elected as manager, but
I also think it's disingenuous for you to *not* mention this fact when you
are proposing ideas like term limits and, as a developer, spearheading this
"reform" campaign rather than assisting in the existing and ambitious effort
that is underway. 

I think that what happened a few days ago is connected to your term limits
idea, as an example, as well as being a large motivating factor for your
"reform" effort.  Can you honestly claim that you had this term limits idea
*before* you were not elected to a manager position? Can you honestly say
that you are dispassionate -- unaffected by your own personal emotions -- in
your analysis of what Gentoo currently needs?

I don't think you can say that. 

You have had good ideas about our management structure in the past, but this
new effort is clearly different from your previous collaborative idea
sharing, both in content, tone, and in how you are choosing to interact with
users who happen to have differing views. It feels like a political campaign.

And I would have sent this email privately if not for the fact that you are
being unreasonable in your posts. Since you are not representing Gentoo in a way
that I consider to be appropriate, I need to jump in like this and say "I
disagree with your approach." Because at this point, it's important for our
users to know that you certainly don't represent my ideas or views, and that
your general vision may not be entirely shared by those on our management
team.

I don't want our users to get the idea that your ideas necessarily reflect
where Gentoo is headed. Some of your ideas may be implemented, some may not,
but we are not on a holy mission to create a bureaucracy. As we move forward
in our efforts to establish a not-for-profit entity, it's important for our
users to know that we are aggressively working to intentify the good things
that makes Gentoo "Gentoo" and ensure that they remain intact.

We are being very careful to not destroy the very good things about Gentoo
in our efforts to improve areas that need to be improved. I seen it clearly
demonstrated that our management team is very much attuned to this critical
balance. I encourage you to support their efforts.

Sincerely,

-- 
Daniel Robbins
Chief Architect, Gentoo Linux
http://www.gentoo.org