Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Roy Bamford <neddyseagoon@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ML changes
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:21:02
Message-Id: 1184696094l.7335l.0l@spike
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: ML changes by Chris Gianelloni
1 On 2007.07.13 18:12, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
2 > On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 08:34 +0200, Christian Faulhammer wrote:
3 > > Mike Doty <kingtaco@g.o>:
4 > >
5 > > > We're voting on this next council meeting so if you have input,
6 > now
7 > > > would be the time.
8 > >
9 > > Really, I don't like the idea...the list has been calm for some
10 > time
11 > > now, the discussions were lengthy sometimes but not aggressive.
12 >
13 [snip stuff I mostly agree with]
14 > --
15 > Chris Gianelloni
16 > Release Engineering Strategic Lead
17 > Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
18 > Games Developer/Soon to be former Council Member and glad/Foundation
19 > Trustee
20 > Gentoo Foundation
21 >
22
23 The original vision for the proctors failed because the council
24 perceived that the proctors was going to be a a high profile,
25 preemptive action project, mostly on the -dev mailing list.
26 To be preemptive requires time to act - which is just not possible
27 without moderation or some form of delay.
28 To be high profile requires to be very public too, so there is actually
29 a profile to see at all. Human nature dictates that individuals don't
30 like the 'loss of face' associated with having their shortcomings
31 pointed out in public, thus the most successful proctors work was
32 carried out on a one to one basis, not preemtively and in a very low
33 profile way. In my opinion, the project was successful in improving
34 communications but not in the way it was originally envisioned by the
35 council when the project was started.
36 Oh - a final word on the proctors ... there is no need to be a member
37 of any project to smooth out misunderstandings or help improve
38 communications. A thick skin to avoid being upset when you try to help
39 and its not required is an asset though.
40
41
42 I don't like the proposed ML change, for several reasons.
43
44 1. As others have said, it will create a class structure within Gentoo,
45 with non-dev contributors becoming second class citizens. At the same
46 time, the barrier to becoming a develper will be increased.
47
48 2. Something that can be done by *anybody* (list moderation) will be
49 done by *nobody* - You only need look around at your workplace to see
50 that. Worse still, if the proposed moderation actually happens, it will
51 be based on nepotism. I say that because people will only look at posts
52 they are likely to be interested in.
53
54 3. Gentoo is a living organism ... users (including devs) contribute
55 what they can when they can. As has already been discussed,
56 organisations go through several major structural changes as they grow
57 and its possible gentoo is due one now.
58 Keeping in mind those three points I propose that :-
59 a) -core is unchanged
60 b) -dev has its scope narrowed to gentoo wide technical issues only
61 c) -per herd lists are used for traffic that does not concern almost
62 everyone.
63
64 This reducing the scope of of -dev reduces the noise on the list as
65 presently, even the on topic posts are noise to most devs.
66
67 The above restructuring allows room for gentoo to grow, without
68 creating any second class citizens and reduces the perceived noise on -
69 dev at the same time.
70
71 Should the council want to enable moderation, they need to appoint a
72 group to do it *everyone* simply won't work. Finding members might be
73 difficult as the original ML control group has just been disbanded.
74
75 Before the council vote on this latest idea, I suggest they learn from
76 the open source movement and look at other distros that have survived
77 to become bigger (head count) than Gantoo and see what they did. There
78 is no need to reinvent the wheel or suffer from the 'not invented here'
79 syndrome. Drawing on what other distros or large projects have done is
80 the was OSS works.
81
82 The worst thing the council can do is vote this measure as a parting
83 gesture, a process that cannot be completed before the existing
84 councils last meeting on 9th August. It needs proper research and
85 consideration so is best left to the incoming council since they will
86 have to live with the decision.
87
88 Regards,
89
90 Roy Bamford
91 (NeddySegoon)
92 --
93 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list