1 |
John, I've followed this thread and given this some thought and am submitting |
2 |
my 2 cents as a simpel user who has only done one ebuild (in progress). |
3 |
|
4 |
1. Who do I need protection from? I've not found the Gentoo management |
5 |
doing anything I needed protection from. The Social contract is good enough |
6 |
for me. |
7 |
|
8 |
2. Voting on what? Gentoo does not appear to be a democracy nor should it |
9 |
be. To be effective there have to be leaders/managers who can make decisions |
10 |
without having to consult an entire constituancy or large group. If leaders |
11 |
have to take a vote before they do anything then nothing will get done. |
12 |
|
13 |
In many cases we as users do vote. If there are enough request/bugs for a |
14 |
package or feature it usually gets done. If there aren't enough requests or |
15 |
no one wants to create or maintain a package then it doesn't get done. |
16 |
|
17 |
3. Why? To be honest I don't see the links to Gentoo being community owned |
18 |
nor do I see it as a democracy. Daniel Robbins started it and set it up and |
19 |
now has people who have volunteered to help in many ways but it's his effort |
20 |
that got things going and his vison that is to be followed. If Gentoo gets |
21 |
to far off track then it will fall off in popularity and use. In short, |
22 |
Daniel put the time and effort into starting it - it's his thing. Yes, he is |
23 |
trying to set up an organization that will help keep it running and wants to |
24 |
share it but still, it's his vision. If put all that effort into creating a |
25 |
distro I'd sure want to make sure that I had a large say in the direction it |
26 |
took. - yes, I would try and make sure it was "shared" but I would want to |
27 |
set the direction of it. |
28 |
|
29 |
Much of this point sounds paranoid to me - are people really worrying about |
30 |
what is happening to their interests? I understand they are volunteers - if |
31 |
someone feels he's being abused and can't work it out he can stop doing work |
32 |
for Gentoo. |
33 |
|
34 |
4. Does Gentoo really need a parlimentary procedure? Yes, Robert's rules |
35 |
have some guidelines that can help a meeting run smoothly but in all the |
36 |
meetings I 've been in the entire process has not been used. In most project |
37 |
meetings you state the objectives or scope and go from there getting input |
38 |
and making decisions. |
39 |
|
40 |
I have never used debian but from all I've seen and heard (and not just in |
41 |
this discussion) it is a nice distro but the stable branch is way behind in |
42 |
what's available. Why use it as a model? |
43 |
|
44 |
Also, Gentoo leaders have recognized that the phenomenal growth has caused |
45 |
problems (even slower growth would have caused this <G>!). However, they |
46 |
appear to be taking steps to react to this - why not see how those changes |
47 |
work? |
48 |
|
49 |
As I said, I'm just a user but of all the distro's I've tried Gentoo is |
50 |
really the best. It's eliminated RPM messes and frustration, it's solid and |
51 |
stable (unless you're stupid enough to do ~arch on your production systems |
52 |
<G>) , packages that I've needed are kept up to date, and it is easy to |
53 |
maintain. I hate to see it turned into a bureucratic organization that |
54 |
produces a dead distro. |
55 |
|
56 |
I'm not sure it's broken so let's not be too quick to fix it. |
57 |
|
58 |
> Good evening all: |
59 |
> I am sure that you have all noticed the recent changes in the Gentoo Linux |
60 |
> management. For this effort, I believe that our current managers should be |
61 |
> applauded for thier candidness and openness. Although, as with any |
62 |
> organization, there is always room for constant change and improvement. |
63 |
> Gentoo's current position can be summarized by a quote from bussiness |
64 |
> philosopher Edward Demming: |
65 |
> |
66 |
> Change is not mandatory, because survival is not a necessity. |
67 |
> |
68 |
> Gentoo is at a crossroads: We can either continue to change and improve our |
69 |
> management structure, or simply die like many other Linux distributions. |
70 |
> |
71 |
> In light of this issue, I propose the following changes to the Gentoo |
72 |
> management structure: |
73 |
> |
74 |
> 1. Constitution |
75 |
> All great organizations realize the need to protect their most important |
76 |
> asset, their volunteers and employees. Gentoo does not have such a |
77 |
> document, therefore there is no 'legal' protection for the developers and |
78 |
> volunteers. Although we all know that Gentoo is commited to this, it is |
79 |
> nowhere in writing. |
80 |
> |
81 |
> References: The Debian Constitution |
82 |
> http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution |
83 |
> |
84 |
> 2. Open voting |
85 |
> At this point in time, there is no published ruleset for voting, and there |
86 |
> is no public record of voting results. There is also no offical published |
87 |
> method of calculating a voting quorum. Additionally, with regard to the |
88 |
> election of new managers, the vote is kept secret |
89 |
. |
90 |
> |
91 |
> In order for any democratic system that uses voting to be successful, there |
92 |
> *must* be accountability, concrete rules, and open results. How can there |
93 |
> possibly be accountability if the results of the vote are kept completely |
94 |
> secret? The find line between an oligarchy and a representative democracy |
95 |
> is voting accountability. The developers, managers, and uses *must* know |
96 |
> that the Gentoo voting process is secure in its philosophy and practice. |
97 |
> |
98 |
> References: |
99 |
> http://www.debian.org/vote/ (Voting policy) |
100 |
> http://www.debian.org/vote/2002/vote_0001 (Sample voting results) |
101 |
> http://www.debian.org/vote/howto_vote (John Davis <zhen@g.o>Sample |
102 |
voting ballot) |
103 |
> |
104 |
> 3. Defined terms for managers |
105 |
> In order to preserve the balance of power, while at the same time |
106 |
> protecting the rights and interests of the users and developers, it is |
107 |
> necessary that all manager positions have a clear term length along with a |
108 |
> clear and defined manager voting process (see above). |
109 |
> |
110 |
> The developers and users need to make sure that their interests are being |
111 |
> maintained, and that the managers are true delegates for the Gentoo |
112 |
> community. The developers, as well as managers, need to ensure that this |
113 |
> stays true through normal managerial election. |
114 |
> |
115 |
> 4. Clear meeting procedure |
116 |
> I encourage all developers and managers to review Robert's Book of Rules, |
117 |
> as it provides invaluable information on proactive meeting procedure. |
118 |
> |
119 |
> By creating this document, I hope to help fix the problems that I see with |
120 |
> Gentoo Linux. I believe that positive, intellectual conversation can lead |
121 |
> us to the light at the end of the tunnel. I encourage you all to |
122 |
> participate in this discussion, but please restrain from anger, lashing |
123 |
> out, etc. |
124 |
> |
125 |
> Kind regards, |
126 |
> //zhen |
127 |
|
128 |
-- |
129 |
|
130 |
Brett I. Holcomb |
131 |
AKA Grunt <>< |
132 |
|
133 |
-- |
134 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |