| 1 |
> Imagine this situation: DevA argues with DevB about an issue that he |
| 2 |
> thinks is a mistake. Assume that the argument doesn't contradict the |
| 3 |
> etiquette policies (i.e. doesn't resort to public name-calling). DevB |
| 4 |
> gets pissed off that DevA argued against his idea, and contacts his |
| 5 |
> DevRel pal, DevC, embellishing on a few facts to make it seem like DevA |
| 6 |
> is breaking some etiquette guidelines. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
This is why DevRel is a "last resort" and resolution of developer to |
| 9 |
developer issues through the Ombudsmen is the recommended procedure - |
| 10 |
since we're a team DevB isn't everybody's pal and that should prevent |
| 11 |
any issues like that. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
[1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/ombudsman/index.xml |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
"Given the impressive number of Gentoo developers, it is inevitable that |
| 16 |
occasional clashes will occur between developers and managers and |
| 17 |
between developers and developers. Establishment of an official |
| 18 |
ombudsman--one who has been assigned to impartially investigate |
| 19 |
complaints and settle disputes--is one mechanism to prevent such |
| 20 |
disputes from escalating out of control." |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> The above doesn't seem so far-fetched - or maybe it is: that document |
| 23 |
> didn't answer many questions about how the whole devrel process works. |
| 24 |
> If the devrel policies had a built-in appeal process, it might go a long |
| 25 |
> way towards alleviating the fears of some devs that devrel is becoming a |
| 26 |
> sort of "big brother" organisation. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> DevC, being a good pal of DevB, |
| 29 |
> believes him, and initiates a suspension process of DevA. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Since Developer Relations again consists of several ( Currently 11 ) |
| 32 |
people; this again should not be an issue. Also, suspensions are only |
| 33 |
taken when *every* other option has failed - and DevA has been warned on |
| 34 |
countless occasions of the same problem. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
> As has also been commented in this thread, a document outlining devrel's |
| 37 |
> responsibilities and processes would be quite welcome - both for devs |
| 38 |
> and users, who could use the document as a point of reference in filing |
| 39 |
> or contesting a devrel complaint or suspension. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
[2] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/ |
| 42 |
[3] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/policy.xml |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
"The stated goal for developer relations is to act as a meeting point |
| 45 |
for Gentoo developers and advanced users both. As such, developer |
| 46 |
relations is concerned with both intra-developer relations as well as |
| 47 |
forming relations with advanced users and prospective developers." |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
The policy [3] outlines more on how we aim to do this job - hope this helps! |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Thanks! |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
| Tim Yamin: plasmaroo@g.o |
| 54 |
| = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = |
| 55 |
| Gentoo Linux Developer Relations |
| 56 |
| Gentoo Linux X86 Core and Kernel Team |
| 57 |
| Gentoo Security and GLSA Security Systems |
| 58 |
| Gentoo Scientific and EDA Package Development |
Archives