Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Daniel Robbins <drobbins@g.o>
To: Joshua Brindle <method@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-core@g.o, gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] *IMPORTANT* top-level management structure!
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 17:27:39
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 11:02:00AM -0500, Joshua Brindle wrote:
> i'd like the managers here to speak, authoritatively, what the ultimate delagations > will be within this category. I know it was intentionally left vague in the draft but > I want to know right now what the intended organization of the "gentoo-linux" > subproject,
Well, first, we don't have any intentions other than to ensure than that we move from an "adhocracy" to a well-organized development project. Meaning that existing roles and responsibilities of developers within the Gentoo Linux project will be fully respected and reflected in the organization as this plan is implemented. The only exception to this rule are for those developers who are actively looking to have *fewer* responsibilities in certain areas. For example, top-level managers will generally be looking to be released from their day-to-day development responsibilities. We can expect there to be exceptions to this too, as I don't expect pvdabeel to stop managing Gentoo/PPC, or you to stop managing Gentoo/BSD, unless at some point one of you decides that you would rather focus on other areas. The goal isn't to impose a radically redesigned structure but to ensure that the "structure" we currently have, what exists of it, becomes more clearly defined, with clearly documented roles and authorities for our projects, and that regular meetings and status updates are established, as well as mutual accountability to one another. We suffer from lack of organization, not lack of ability. I have full confidence in the technical ability of our team and I know that everyone has been trying as best they can to get things done under the current environment. Obviously, along the way, we'll find some areas of Gentoo Linux that need more definition. It will be the authority of our respective sub-project leads to provide additional organization to these efforts, which can be done by recursively implementing the management structure. One suggestion reflected in the gentoo-linux project list is subdividing larger arch projects into stable and unstable development efforts, thus ensuring that we have teams ensuring that both parts of our tree are working optimally. This will likely happen for x86, as I think that seemant and I will agree that it makes sense. And this will also allow us to delegate authority and responsibilties to the x86 and ~x86 project leads. As for whether it happens in other arches, that is up to the arch lead. So for PPC, this would be considered an internal matter of the PPC project and would be decided by pvdabeel. He could establish a ppc/~ppc organizational structure, or any other structure for PPC, as he sees fit, at a time he sees fit, if at all. As for the final sub-project list, it is going to reflect the current efforts under way, so that means that we will have sub-projects for KDE, GNOME and others. All existing efforts will be reflected in the new structure. There will also be opportunities to improve things somewhat. For example, it could be a good thing to have an "x86-core" group that focuses on "core" stuff like gcc, binutils, glibc, bootstrapping, baselayout and the default system profile. Seemant and I are going to be focusing primarily on "x86" organization. PowerPC, alpha, sparc, mips, hppa as well as KDE, GNOME and other project organization will be the responsibility of the respective project leads. I expect there to be some general tie-in with our herd organizational efforts to define project roles.
> So, i'm asking, right now for the managers mentioned for gentoo-linux to give > some expected organization. Thanks :)
I hope that what I wrote up there ^^^^ helped :) Best Regards, -- Daniel Robbins Chief Architect, Gentoo Linux