Re: [gentoo-nfp] [RFC] Alternative methods for determining 'interest in Foundation affairs'

[Roy Bamford]

On 2019.09.06 17:48, Michael Everitt wrote:
> On 06/09/19 15:36, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:51:00PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 6:42 PM Robin H. Johnson
> <robbat2@g.o> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 01:45:25PM -0700, Alec Warner wrote:
> >>>>> 3. It is really meaningless.  Casting a vote does not really
> indicate
> >>>>> any interest in GF.  It only indicates that someone has done the
> minimal
> >>>>> effort to avoid being kicked.  There is no reason to conflate
> the two.
> >>>> I'm certainly interested in other avenues of interest, but I
> don't see very
> >>>> many in this thread other than "AGM attendance" and "asking
> people if they
> >>>> are interested[0]"
> >>> - Does involvement on mailing lists count?
> >>> - What other ways outside development might somebody be involved
> in
> >>>   Gentoo? Not everybody is a developer, let alone an ebuild
> developer.
> >>>   What if we wound up with PR people who weren't devs at all, but
> loved
> >>>   to talk about Gentoo?
> >> Gentoo developers do not have to have commit access.  If somebody
> is
> >> doing significant PR work for Gentoo then they should be made a
> >> developer.  Developers do not need to pass the ebuild quiz.
> > I meant "developer" as the generic "one who develops software".
> > Ebuilds are not the only code-like activity, there's multiple other
> > software packages that Gentoo relies on: openrc, netifrc, genkernel,
> > catalyst, eselect are some of them.
> > They may have commit access to those packages, and not to ebuilds.
> >
> > I need to distinguish between:
> > - ebuild coding contribution
> > - non-ebuild-coding contribution
> > - non-coding contribution
> >
> >> Anybody with an @g.o email address is a developer.
> >>
> >> We used to use the term "staff" but anybody who used to be
> considered
> >> "staff" is now considered a "developer."
> > I stated when the switch away from "staff" was done, that I felt we
> were
> > doing ourselves a dis-service by not picking a better word than
> > "developer" - something that includes all of the contributions
> above,
> > without implying specific technical skills. "Contributor" was
> down-voted
> > at the time.
> >
> Reading (somewhat extensively) between the lines, there is a subtle
> move
> for those developing code and ebuilds to "take over" control and
> management
> of the distribution (cf. electorate of 'council'). Whether this is
> something that is (1) really happening or (2) desirable, I shall leave
> as
> an exercise for the reader; but I thought was probably worth
> highlighting.
>

Compare the numbers of staffers to developers.
Its not really surprising that developers fill most of the "control 
and management" roles in the distro.

There have been staffers on both the council and trustees.

In my view, your observation is both correct and not 
statistically significant.

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
arm64