Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 23:10 +0530, Abhay Kedia wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 Nov 2005 10:09 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > *sigh*
> >
> > Another "Gentoo is about choice" argument.  Can I ask you something?
> > Where does it say that Gentoo is about choice?  I see lots of places
> > that say that Gentoo allows you to customize, but nowhere do I see
> > anything that says that we are about choice.
>
> I am a really novice desktop end-user and am following gentoo-dev just for
> learning what all goes through the minds of the uber gentoo developers. I
> have no say in this discussion as it doesn't effect me and am certainly not
> qualified to get into an argument with someone like you but I have read your
> posts mentioning this "Where does it say that Gentoo is about choice?"
> argument lots of time.

You have just as much right to speak your mind as I.  We aren't special
because we're developers.  We're all just Gentoo users like you.  We
just contribute our time to improve Gentoo.  If you file bug reports or
participate in discussions here, then you're doing the same.

> Till now I also had a picture in my mind that Gentoo was actually about
> "choice" and when I saw that picture getting shattered by a Lead Developer, I
> went to look for the places that made me think about Gentoo in that way i.e.
> "Gentoo is about choice". These are the few things I could find.

The problem with the "Gentoo is about choice" argument is that it is
used to back up any argument where there's not really a good reason for
making the changes *except* for choice.

> 1) On the about page with picture of "Larry The Cow":
> http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/about.xml
> "He discovered lots of up-to-date packages that could be auto-built
> using the optimizations settings and build-time functionality that
> he wanted, rather than what some distro creator thought would be
> best for him. All of the sudden, Larry the Cow was in control. And
> he liked it."
> ---rather than what some distro creator thought would be
> best for him.
> ^ that statement makes you think it is about choice.

It can imply that, but it does not state it.

Also, remember that having the *ability* to enact change yourself to
make things the way you want is not the same as developers being
*forced* to do something simply so you have a choice.

As I stated before, you're more than able to take a stage3 tarball +
catalyst + the example catalyst spec files and build your own stage1
tarball.  In fact, this is the exact same procedure that Release
Engineering uses in building these tarballs to begin with.  So the
"choice" is still there.

> 2) The Philosophy: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/philosophy.xml
> "If the tool forces the user to do things a particular way, then the tool is
> working against, rather than for, the user."

Again, you're still free to do what you chose using the tools we
provide...

...or are you calling *me* a tool?  ;P

> 3) Gentoo Social Contract: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml
> "A Gentoo operating system should satisfy the self-hosting requirement. In
> other words, the operating system should be able to build itself from scratch
> using the aforementioned tools and metadata. If a product associated with an
> official Gentoo project does not satisfy these requirements, the product does
> not qualify as a Gentoo operating system."

Removing stage1 instructions doesn't go against this in any way.

> All these things "imply" that there should be a choice for a user to do what
> ever way he/she wants while building his/her system i.e. even from scratch.

Nowhere have I suggested a method of change that would remove this
"choice" from the users.

The problem is that people are confusing "choice" with "developers doing
it for me".  Just because *I* don't build a stage1 tarball, or just
because the instructions are not in the Handbook, does not mean that you
cannot still perform a stage1 installation.  All of the tools for you to
do this are still there, you just have to take the time to use them.

> Since these documents just implied the "Choice" nature of Gentoo, I went ahead
> and did some googling to actually get the direct connection. Searching for
> "gentoo about choice" leads 653,000 results and just the first two results
> are enough to get the point across for a user.

They implied it.  They did not state it.  However, it was pointed out to
me that the Handbook, does indeed have the "Gentoo is about choice"
mantra in it.  I plan on filing a bug against the Handbook to have this
changed to something a bit closer to fact, which I will explain a bit
further below.

> 1) From 1st Link:
> Gentoo Weekly Newsletter: March 28th, 2005
> http://www.gentoo.org/news/en/gwn/20050328-newsletter.xml
> Developer of the week talks
> "Gentoo represents choice and freedom for every user to build their computing
> environment to their individual needs, by giving them the tools to do it." --
> Marcus D. Hanwell (cryos)

Right.  Giving them the tools.  It doesn't say being forced to do
something they think is a bad idea and to continue bad practices simply
to ease user issues with the choices that they have made.  Also, a
single developer's statement does not speak for the entire project.
What Marcus has to say speaks for the entire project no more than what I
say does, which is that I only speak for myself.

> 2) From 2nd Link:
> Trusted Gentoo : by Daniel Black
> http://www.gentoo.org/news/20050202-trustedgentoo.xml
> "Gentoo is about choice"
>
> The last link should settle it for you?

Not really.

> Can we now comfortably say that "Gentoo is about choice"? The other 652,998
> links might reveal a few more places where we can get the choice idea from
> but I hope that all these links should be sufficient to give anyone this
> idea.

No.

I think instead we should say that Gentoo is about empowerment.  Allow
me to explain.  Saying that Gentoo is about choice implies that we will
take any patches or any feature requests, no matter how pointless or
useless, and increase our workload, simply to give our users more
"choice".  This is, in fact, extremely far from the truth.  Instead, we
give the users the tools that they need to accomplish what they want.
We *empower* them to make choices.  If you want a stage1 tarball, make
one.  Don't like our choices of kernel sources?  Add your own to an
overlay.  Just because you have the ability to enact a change does not
mean that we should be forced to put it into the main distribution and
*support* it.  Because of this, Gentoo is definitely *not* about choice,
but is about *empowering* our users to make choices.  They're only
subtly different, but it is that difference that keeps Gentoo running.

Check bugs.gentoo.org for WONTFIX resolution codes.  Look for places
where we have refused to add features unless they were adopted by
upstream.  You will find countless examples of us *refusing* to add
choices to ensure the quality of Gentoo as a whole.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux