1 |
On 8/24/06, Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> A distribution is more than just an entity that packages upstream |
3 |
> tarballs. I agree with your point, but it misses a large chunk of what |
4 |
> we do. |
5 |
|
6 |
We do more than that, sure, but the vast majority of the day to day |
7 |
work in Gentoo is exactly that - packaging software released by |
8 |
upstream, and fixing bugs reported back from users. |
9 |
|
10 |
What do you do that goes beyond this? |
11 |
|
12 |
> If this is the Gentoo vision, then why are we even doing anything else? |
13 |
|
14 |
Because folks want to? Because we've been recruiting people to |
15 |
shoulder the load, instead of recruiting them into a culture? Because |
16 |
we want to see Gentoo run on a wider variety of hardware than |
17 |
$upstream has access to? Because we want to make Gentoo more |
18 |
accessible to folks than it was in the past? |
19 |
|
20 |
What activities are we doing that don't directly support the Gentoo vision? |
21 |
|
22 |
> We've already reached our only goal, which is packaging stuff, and all |
23 |
> we need to do is bump it. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> People need to feel that Gentoo is _moving forward_, that it's actually |
26 |
> going somewhere. |
27 |
|
28 |
We have no organisation that's going out there making deals with |
29 |
commercial entities, ISV partners, nor users. In that respect, we're |
30 |
a completely different beast to RedHat, SuSE and Ubuntu. |
31 |
|
32 |
You're not the first, and you won't be the last, to complain that |
33 |
we're not going anywhere. My question is simple : where do folks want |
34 |
to go, and what is stopping them getting there? Seriously - what |
35 |
exactly is this enormous brick wall that folks need a boost from |
36 |
management to climb over? |
37 |
|
38 |
> Then why wasn't the hierarchy fixed? Instead we somehow ended up in this |
39 |
> huge metastructure debate and changed everything around. |
40 |
|
41 |
It was hardly a "huge" debate, unless your only metric of measurement |
42 |
is number of posts. Take that debate, and then re-imagine it as an |
43 |
event in the physical world, with folks having face to face contact. |
44 |
You'll find that none of these debates are really that big. They just |
45 |
seem big, because electronc communications can be so inefficient. |
46 |
|
47 |
Personally, I'm opposed to a return that that hierarchy. The idea |
48 |
that somehow desktop, server, and other such projects should sit at an |
49 |
exclusive top-table doesn't work for me. |
50 |
|
51 |
Gentoo would be much more effective with having a core management team |
52 |
that covered our key operations (infra, devrel, userrel, pr, releng, |
53 |
and 'tools' - portage and catalyst), and which ensured that they all |
54 |
worked together to give the outward appearance of an organised |
55 |
distribution. Have management focus on what forms the "spine" of the |
56 |
Gentoo organisation. |
57 |
|
58 |
The lack of this management structure is, to pick one example, behind |
59 |
the grief Infra are getting over the long-term problems with bugzilla. |
60 |
Folks aren't complaining about bugzilla any more; they're complaining |
61 |
about the problem continuing. Effective senior management would have |
62 |
done three things in particular here which would each have made a |
63 |
difference: |
64 |
|
65 |
a) They would have provided oversight on Infra's handling of the problems. |
66 |
b) They would have communicated effectively with the wider |
67 |
organisation, explaining what was going on, why, and when it would be |
68 |
resolved. This communication would be early, it would be frequent. |
69 |
c) They would provide Infra with resources they can't get on their |
70 |
own to solve the problem, including additional budget. |
71 |
|
72 |
It's been agreed on -dev that it's not the existing Council's job to |
73 |
do any of these things wrt the ongoing bugzilla problems. So |
74 |
everyone's left with a service that's not fit for purpose at the |
75 |
moment, and only Infra to grumble about. Everyone loses sight of the |
76 |
steps Infra is taking to resolve matters, and nobody wins. |
77 |
|
78 |
Your "top table" of herds does nothing to address what Gentoo really |
79 |
needs. It's a step backwards at best. |
80 |
|
81 |
> "Official" votes, sure. But what about GLEP discussions on -dev? That's |
82 |
> the only way anything major ever happens, and it might as well be a |
83 |
> requirement for a unanimous vote among all ~350 developers. The only |
84 |
> time I can recall even a single dissenter before a GLEP moved on to the |
85 |
> council was brix on Sunrise. |
86 |
|
87 |
I call bullshit on this. Big time. |
88 |
|
89 |
There are lots of major things happening all the time - you're one of |
90 |
the people who make this happen - and they don't require GLEPs. GCC |
91 |
upgrades, X.Org 7, Portage 2.1, Gentoo Overlays, Java 1.5 - these and |
92 |
many _many_ more are all major things for the users affected by them. |
93 |
|
94 |
What major things do you want to see that aren't getting done because |
95 |
of the perceived need for GLEPs? |
96 |
|
97 |
It's also worth pointing out that we're hardly snowed under with |
98 |
GLEPs. There has been only 51 in the last three years; that's less |
99 |
than two a month on average, and just under 50% of GLEPs were filed in |
100 |
the first twelve months of the GLEP process's existance. |
101 |
|
102 |
Your recollection is faulty; there _is_ no GLEP for sunrise. |
103 |
|
104 |
> > The basic cause always comes down to weak or non-existent management. |
105 |
> |
106 |
> Yes, and that's exactly my point. We need stronger management. |
107 |
|
108 |
We need _appropriate_ management. You can over-manage something just |
109 |
as easily as under-managing it. Strong management is just as |
110 |
misguided. It leads to bullying, and certainly over here in the UK |
111 |
there is serious debate about whether it has gotten so far out of hand |
112 |
that the law needs changing to address it. |
113 |
|
114 |
> > I'm not sure how you can justify that statement. To the best of my |
115 |
> > knowledge, that system has only been tested in full the once - when |
116 |
> > Brian was suspended from the project and Ciaran was expelled. |
117 |
> |
118 |
> That in itself is proof enough. There were numerous instances where it |
119 |
> _should_ have been tested but wasn't, because of all the hassle required |
120 |
> to do anything. |
121 |
|
122 |
You're accusing devrel of not taking disciplinary action against |
123 |
Gentoo devs because the process is too much hassle? That would be a |
124 |
very serious charge. |
125 |
|
126 |
Or you're saying that Gentoo devs are not making complaints to devrel |
127 |
because devrel's process is too much hassle? In that case, why are |
128 |
you complaining on -dev about it? You know our conflict resolution |
129 |
rules, and they don't include bitching about it on -dev. |
130 |
|
131 |
> > Can you back this up with three examples in the last twelve months |
132 |
> > where this has happened? |
133 |
> |
134 |
> Any long debate where more than 25% of the posts came from a single person. |
135 |
|
136 |
I find that a poor criteria. If you think about how few folks in |
137 |
Gentoo are involved in any one area, and that most change usually has |
138 |
one person acting as 'poster boy' for it, it's inevitable that you'll |
139 |
end up with long debates matching that sort of criteria. |
140 |
|
141 |
Please, provide specific examples to support your arguments. |
142 |
|
143 |
> > Hrm. Where is this lack of respect for devrel being displayed today? |
144 |
> > What forms does this lack of respect take? If there's a lack of |
145 |
> > respect at the moment, it's not for devrel. |
146 |
> |
147 |
> How about in Gentoo's complete inability to do anything about the |
148 |
> constant trolling and people acting like assholes? |
149 |
|
150 |
How is that a lack of respect for _devrel_? Wouldn't that be more |
151 |
accurately described as a lack of respect between the trolls / |
152 |
assholes and everyone else? |
153 |
|
154 |
One person's troll isn't always another person's, as we'll see in a moment. |
155 |
|
156 |
Who are the people you think Gentoo is completely unable to do anything about? |
157 |
|
158 |
> We say we're about |
159 |
> courtesy but we don't (can't?) do a damn thing about it, because it |
160 |
> requires a huge, convoluted investigation and trial and nobody's willing |
161 |
> to waste that much time. |
162 |
|
163 |
What is stopping you fixing devrel? And why are you complaining to |
164 |
-dev about devrel? Shouldn't you be complaining to _them_? And if |
165 |
your complaint to them has been unsuccessful, have you complained to |
166 |
the council? I can't find a record of that in the council logs (my |
167 |
apologies if I've missed it). |
168 |
|
169 |
I don't see how bitching on -dev is going to achieve anything - or how |
170 |
it makes you any different from the unnamed folks you're complaining |
171 |
about. |
172 |
|
173 |
> I know this is partially changing, but I'm unsure that any group outside |
174 |
> of the council will ever be trusted to suspend or kick people out. |
175 |
|
176 |
The folks who don't accept devrel ... I don't see any reason why they |
177 |
would accept the council on this matter. These things don't seem to |
178 |
be about _who_ is doing the kicking ... it seems to be more about |
179 |
whether the kicking should be happening at all. |
180 |
|
181 |
I don't see how bringing in a dictator is going to suddenly change the |
182 |
trust in these matters, either. |
183 |
|
184 |
> Some Debian developers commented on my blog about how valuable DebConf |
185 |
> was for this. |
186 |
|
187 |
I've been told the same from other groups too. We'll see with the |
188 |
trustee elections whether or not there's enough support for it amongst |
189 |
Gentoo devs for it. |
190 |
|
191 |
> > I'd also argue that we're _not_ powerless. It wasn't pleasant, but |
192 |
> > the old system has shown that we can deal with genuine trouble makers. |
193 |
> |
194 |
> Barely, and with enormous effort ... |
195 |
|
196 |
If I wanted to fire an employee at work, the effort involved is |
197 |
_substantially_ more than what we went through with that process. |
198 |
Sure, we can learn from it and improve matters (and devrel are doing |
199 |
exactly that; they're not exactly sitting around doing sweet FA about |
200 |
it), but you have to see things in perspective. |
201 |
|
202 |
> > We don't have a democracy. Gentoo is largely a workocracy (there must |
203 |
> > be a better word for it ;), where the vast majority decisions are made |
204 |
> > by the folks who actually do the work. |
205 |
> |
206 |
> Only the small-scale decisions. |
207 |
|
208 |
I can't agree with that. I think that's demeaning to all the package |
209 |
maintainers, arch teams, releng folks, and other staffers who each and |
210 |
every day make decisions that are very important to the users that |
211 |
they are focused on. |
212 |
|
213 |
> > Folks don't vote on stuff. To pick a recent example, none of the |
214 |
> > folks who opposed Sunrise actually had any means to vote to prevent it |
215 |
> > happening. What they had to do was to lobby the council, who were the |
216 |
> > only folks with a vote. |
217 |
> |
218 |
> Oh, gimme a break. Screaming about it on -dev for hundreds of posts |
219 |
> isn't just equivalent to a vote, it's better. It makes people think |
220 |
> there's more than 2 developers opposed to it. |
221 |
|
222 |
Bullshit. |
223 |
|
224 |
You're shifting the argument here. You started by arguing that we |
225 |
have a democracy - and that it's a bad thing - and when I give you a |
226 |
real example of how folks didn't have a vote on something that was |
227 |
important to them, you shift the argument to complain about folks |
228 |
voicing their opposition. |
229 |
|
230 |
For the record, there _were_ more than two developers opposed to it. |
231 |
Both Ramereth and Kloeri have repeatedly voiced concerns about the |
232 |
project. It was me who suspended the project in the first place, and |
233 |
referred the whole matter to the council for guidance. That makes |
234 |
five right there. |
235 |
|
236 |
And even if there were only two, that's not important. Chris and Brix |
237 |
brought up many valid points, and their efforts ensured the |
238 |
fundamental problems with Sunrise were sorted out before they became a |
239 |
wider problem for Gentoo. They did us all a favour in the long run. |
240 |
|
241 |
I can't agree with your implied statement that they were trolling over |
242 |
Sunrise, or being assholes. I do agree that there was a lack of |
243 |
respect with our rules - which _clearly_ state that projects can go |
244 |
ahead with no announcements, no discussions; all they need is to |
245 |
create a project page. Sunrise followed those rules; I personally |
246 |
made sure of it. |
247 |
|
248 |
Those _rules_ created that mess, just as much as the Sunrise folks did. |
249 |
|
250 |
But where was the outcry from folks, telling Chris and Brix to leave |
251 |
things along, because Sunrise had followed our rules? There was none. |
252 |
Where was the support for updating the rules, and ensuring that |
253 |
another project couldn't do what Sunrise did the way they did it? |
254 |
That was nowhere to be seen either. |
255 |
|
256 |
Frankly, no-one seemed to give a damn about the rules either way. |
257 |
That seems to be the real problem. |
258 |
|
259 |
>From the perspective of what I work on, you've done _far_ more damage |
260 |
with your comment on LWN about the Gentoo Overlays project than Brix |
261 |
and Chris did with the Sunrise debate. I think you have a bloody |
262 |
nerve complaining about trolls and arseholes on here after so casually |
263 |
dismissing the overlays project as "a hack to allow for |
264 |
quasi-distributed development without using a distributed |
265 |
version-control system such as git, mercurial, etc." We set that |
266 |
project up to strengthen our relationships with users, to help get |
267 |
more folks involved in Gentoo, and you go to LWN of all places and so |
268 |
casually dismiss it. |
269 |
|
270 |
We're having a _terrible_ time getting folks outside Gentoo to take |
271 |
any notice of what we do these days. LWN was just about the only |
272 |
mainstream place that mentioned it at all (even GWN hasn't covered it |
273 |
yet, but I'm sure it will). |
274 |
|
275 |
Don't _ever_ do that again to one of my projects. |
276 |
|
277 |
> Untrue, voices make a democracy. |
278 |
|
279 |
No, they just make a noise. It's widely accepted that you can't have a |
280 |
democracy without freedom of speech, but speech alone does not make a |
281 |
democracy. |
282 |
|
283 |
> I'd rather get rid of devrel altogether (at least its conflict |
284 |
> resolution role) and have the council deal with this. |
285 |
|
286 |
Where would someone make their appeal to, after the council decides to |
287 |
kick someone out? |
288 |
|
289 |
> You say "unelected" like it's evil. In a company, nobody gets elected, |
290 |
> but a hell of a lot of work happens. |
291 |
|
292 |
We are _not_ a company. We are a community; or at least, we're trying |
293 |
our collective best to be. |
294 |
|
295 |
There's nothing stopping you moving downstream and forming your own |
296 |
company if you're passionate about adopting that model. Just because |
297 |
Genux was a total disaster, it doesn't mean that the idea's a bad one |
298 |
in principle. |
299 |
|
300 |
(As an aside, folks _do_ get elected in publicly-traded companies, and |
301 |
plenty of companies are terrible at getting work done, which is why |
302 |
many thousands of them close down each year, and why many more of them |
303 |
have weak earnings/costs ratios. It is competition which drives |
304 |
progress, not whether you are a company or not. The whole Linux |
305 |
revolution will stand forever in history as proof of that). |
306 |
|
307 |
> What vote? I'm not running for anything, and I have no desire to do so. |
308 |
|
309 |
My mistake. |
310 |
|
311 |
Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for you, and you do a |
312 |
cracking job on the X11 stuff for Gentoo. But your arguments in this |
313 |
debate have been surprisingly inaccurate, vague, and badly thought |
314 |
through. I have such a high opinion of you from your Gentoo package |
315 |
work that the low quality of your contribution here has really taken |
316 |
me by surprise. |
317 |
|
318 |
> I'm just trying to get people interested in fixing Gentoo so it's not |
319 |
> stuck in the mud. |
320 |
|
321 |
I respect that, but I don't see how you're going to change anything at |
322 |
all going about it like this. |
323 |
|
324 |
There's no detail in what you want to do, only a vague unhappiness |
325 |
with how things are, a desire to return to the "good old days" that |
326 |
never were, backed up by arguments that are demonstrably and factually |
327 |
incorrect or incomplete. |
328 |
|
329 |
What is your plan? Where do you want to take Gentoo, where it isn't |
330 |
already going? |
331 |
|
332 |
Where is your vision, your strategy, your roadmap, your action plans? |
333 |
What are your targets for the next quarter, half, year, and five |
334 |
years? What are your strategic project milestones, and what are the |
335 |
enablers and tactical project milestones required to support them? |
336 |
What are your resource requirements, and your budgets? Which |
337 |
organisations do you need to partner with, and which do you need to |
338 |
engage as suppliers? Which rivals do you intend to compete with, and |
339 |
on what terms? Which values do you need to adjust to gain new |
340 |
markets, and create blue oceans? Who are your senior staff who will |
341 |
share and deliver these plans? What do you need to do to get them |
342 |
onboard? Who are the core customers, and what are their values? Who |
343 |
are the opportunistic customers draining your resources, and how can |
344 |
you get rid of them w/out pissing everyone off? |
345 |
|
346 |
These are exactly the things that Mark Shuttlework and Canonical have |
347 |
answers for, which is one of the reasons Ubuntu are successful at what |
348 |
they want to do. |
349 |
|
350 |
_If_ you're looking at Ubuntu with envious eyes, my advice is that you |
351 |
cross the floor and join them. There's no sense whatsoever in putting |
352 |
Gentoo head-to-head with any of the other Linux distros, unless they |
353 |
try to come after what we are good at. |
354 |
|
355 |
> The goal? |
356 |
|
357 |
The idea would be to devolve power to developers, so that folks who |
358 |
are slackers / trolls / arseholes either have nowhere to go (and |
359 |
therefore drop out by default), or at least are grouped together in |
360 |
one tiny corner that the rest of us can ignore. Most disciplinary |
361 |
matters get delt with locally, and swiftly. The ones that can't ... |
362 |
well, they're exactly the ones where a trial by peers are appropriate. |
363 |
|
364 |
The thing is, businesses have spent centuries looking for a magic |
365 |
bullet for managing staff. They've tried everything they could think |
366 |
of, from outright slavery at one extreme to worker co-operatives at |
367 |
the other. If there was one true way to do it, there wouldn't be any |
368 |
sort of debate about it. But all forms of government come down to the |
369 |
same fundamental - it only works if folks buy into it. |
370 |
|
371 |
Best regards, |
372 |
Stu |
373 |
-- |
374 |
-- |
375 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |