Re: [gentoo-nfp] One Outsider's View

[Alec Warner]

On 1/21/08, Dan Moulding <dmoulding@×××××.com> wrote:
> > the developer base has been discussing how to proceed forward while the
> > current trustees (current leadership as you put it) merely take the steps.
> > the discussion of SFC/SPI/whatever is not limited to the trustees at the
> > moment.
>
> Is the entire developer base participating in this process? Or are
> only a few? It seems like there has been a relatively small number of
> people actively participating in this discussion over the past week
> (at least on this list, which is where Grant asked for this discussion
> to take place).
>
> Having all of the members elect leaders who will ultimately make the
> final decision is the best way to ensure that every person who
> deserves to have a say gets their chance.
>

Most developers don't care as long as the paperwork is taken care of
by someone.  As you noted; few developers have joined the conversation
here (many have conversed on -core; the result of which is basically
the foundation members submitted a counter-offer to Daniel.  The offer
is not yet ready so you haven't seen anything about it.

No one wants to vote on a pair of crappy options if we can engineer
ourselves some better options ;)

> > what are you defining as the "foundation's members" ?  the Gentoo developer
> > base are the people who elect the trustees.  at the moment, voting in a new
> > board wouldnt change the situation we're in and wouldnt change the discussion
> > of how to move forward as all developers are taking part in it.
>
> "Who are these members?  It's anybody who voted in a previous
> Trustee election, and all current Gentoo devs who have been a developer
> for one year at the closing of the election poll and actually vote in
> the election.  The Gentoo Foundation has a _lot_ of members."
>     -- Grant Goodyear
>
> Perhaps this definition of "foundation members" and your definition of
> "Gentoo devloper base" are the same thing. You are right that voting
> in a new board wouldn't change anything. Part of what I'm trying to
> point out here is that maybe *nothing* should change until after a new
> board is elected. Allowing the current decision makers to make the
> next few critical choices, which could alter the course of the
> community significantly and permanently, might not be such a good idea
> considering the track record and how certain things have been allowed
> to deteriorate up to this point.
>

There is no 'allow'.  Legally only certain individuals matter and we
are bound to follow their wishes; it's not like we can perform a coup
and retake the foundation ;)

That being said I trust the current folks to perform admirably in the
short-term; either a transfer of rights to a new board or the SFC/SPI
or whatever.

> > it still takes people to step up and improve
> > quality, write new ebuilds, update documentation, write new documentation,
> > maintain the website, be nice to people, track the forums, etc...  these
> > issues are not tied to the legal status.
>
> You are correct in terms of the actual mechanics of getting these
> things done. The above list of things can be done whether or not a
> Gentoo Foundation even exists. However, when headlines like "Gentoo In
> Crisis" hit the frontpage on Slashdot because the legal side of things
> isn't going the way it's supposed to, it kinda hits the whole
> community in the gut... not just the people who are actually running
> the foundation. Regardless of whether the headlines are true or just
> sensationalist, it can have (has had?) an impact on the morale of the
> community. So, no, these two functions aren't totally separate. What
> happens to one can certainly affect the other.

People are working on these problematic areas; new project leads, new
developers, new blood.

-Alec
-- 
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list