1 |
William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> I would like to believe you have good intentions. Which would be nice |
4 |
> to be able to discuss with you. But seems like you are avoiding any sort |
5 |
> of direct communication possibly confrontations. Can you please start |
6 |
> talking with us, and stop blogging at and about us. It's really adding |
7 |
> an unnecessary layer of drama. |
8 |
> |
9 |
|
10 |
Agreed. I think a lot of developers are genuinely interested in |
11 |
Daniel's proposals and his ideas for trying to improve the distro. |
12 |
However, developers want to feel like they're being led in a common |
13 |
effort - not given orders. As such Daniel's goal needs to be to develop |
14 |
a relationship with the developers, and not merely to seek to gain legal |
15 |
control over the foundation. |
16 |
|
17 |
I'm not quite sure what he expects to happen if he has legal authority |
18 |
over the foundation and chooses to make a technical decision that does |
19 |
not have consensus. Developers really can't be forced to obey, and it |
20 |
could lead to a real mess where you have the foundation threatening the |
21 |
distro with lawsuits over trademarks and copyrights and infrastructure |
22 |
developers revoking accounts as every little fief struggles for control. |
23 |
|
24 |
Is the goal to make Gentoo a success? Then let's start working together |
25 |
and let's stop trying to stir up publicity to try to force everybody to |
26 |
make decisions a certain way. |
27 |
|
28 |
Daniel - take a look at the discussions on the various lists and see |
29 |
what the developers are saying, and react. Maybe you'll win people |
30 |
over. Maybe you won't. Either way it is important to find out. One |
31 |
way or another we will find out which it will be, and it is unlikely |
32 |
that a title like "Gentoo President" will make much difference in your |
33 |
effectiveness in leading the distro. I think that a lot of devs would |
34 |
take your ideas seriously - but you need to trust them to be able to |
35 |
make their own decisions without coercion. In a volunteer-driven |
36 |
organization it really can't work any other way. You can't just have |
37 |
the developers finally agree on a GLEP and then have the foundation step |
38 |
in without bothering to participate and veto it. Why would developers |
39 |
expect you to participate in the day-to-day operations as president when |
40 |
you don't participate on mailing lists as a candidate president? |
41 |
|
42 |
If trying to convince developers of the rightness of your cause isn't |
43 |
worth your time, and you'd simply prefer to dictate a course, I suspect |
44 |
that not much will come of your offer. Sure, it could be put to a vote, |
45 |
but I doubt that will turn out in favor of the role you desire. And |
46 |
legally nothing can happen quickly - in order for a vote to occur there |
47 |
has to be notice/etc - this is a legal corporation and you can't just |
48 |
set up a forum poll to make a decision. |
49 |
|
50 |
That is also a big boundary to involving users legally in the foundation |
51 |
- which ones get to vote and how do you identify them? Does it come |
52 |
down to who can register the largest number of hotmail accounts? Last |
53 |
time I checked postfix can handle a very large alias list... :) And is |
54 |
it in the interests of gentoo to potentially have its developers and |
55 |
foundation in conflict? I think that in the very least we need to base |
56 |
voting on contribution - even if it isn't just developers. |
57 |
|
58 |
Apologies for seeming to hit a couple of topics here in a |
59 |
somewhat-disorganized fashion... |
60 |
-- |
61 |
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |