| 1 |
On Sat, 2007-07-14 at 20:20 +1000, Will Briggs wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> But -dev is where the substantial discussion takes place. -dev would |
| 4 |
> still be the "inside loop." And a community based project simply should |
| 5 |
> not exclude/reduce (even simply in perception) the community's |
| 6 |
> involvement in that loop. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Well forgetting list names for a second. Put the problem another way. |
| 9 |
There is no list at the moment, internal developers could use to |
| 10 |
communicate only with other internal developers. Sure we could use |
| 11 |
-core, but that's more for private stuff. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Devs might want to interact directly with other devs, without any |
| 14 |
outside input. But do it in a transparent manner to keep the community |
| 15 |
informed and a part of the process. Just not a part with input. That |
| 16 |
does not mean the community is excluded. It's just sometimes you can |
| 17 |
have to many opinions, and the ones a times that matter the most are the |
| 18 |
ones actually doing the work. Which in turn become responsible for it. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> Correct me if I'm reading you wrong but you seem, in your choice of |
| 21 |
> words, to be relegating non-devs to being "outside of the Gentoo |
| 22 |
> project." And that is exactly the attitude we need to steer clear of, |
| 23 |
> and exactly the DNA that this proposal would inject. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
It's just levels of separation as the organization grows. It's not an |
| 26 |
attitude of separation, it's organization. It's not meant personally. |
| 27 |
Fact is there are those inside the project and those outside. That's not |
| 28 |
a good or bad thing, just how things are. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
There is no means for those inside to work directly with each others |
| 31 |
without outside influence. Not that the outside influence is not wanted, |
| 32 |
that's not the point at all. It's purely about focus. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
If we see a problem say on -dev, in the future. We know that's an |
| 35 |
internal problem devs are trying to resolve or etc. Likely to get more |
| 36 |
focus and/or prioritization. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Fact is -dev's volume is getting to the point where it's productivity is |
| 39 |
diminishing. Both with dev <-> dev and dev <-> world. The entire idea |
| 40 |
here is to help correct that and makes things BETTER :) |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Many will admit there are big problems now. This is just one attempt, |
| 43 |
one way to address it. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
> I love/admire/adore/have great gratitude for our developers. They are |
| 46 |
> certainly part of this project. But, even as a lowly user - I am also. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
FYI, every developer was a user at some point. In many ways they still |
| 49 |
are. This by no means is intended to diminish, cut off, control, etc any |
| 50 |
user input. That would effectively cut off any future recruiting |
| 51 |
efforts. Which is not the idea at all. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
-- |
| 54 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
| 55 |
Gentoo/Java |
Archives