1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
On 2008.02.02 22:01, Jan Bilek wrote: |
5 |
|
6 |
Jan, |
7 |
|
8 |
As a candidate in the Gentoo Foundation election, I would like to take |
9 |
the time to address the points you have raised. |
10 |
> I am not a developer, just user, but I hope I can dare to express my |
11 |
> opinion - I read these nice ideas about improving communication |
12 |
> between developers and users and I think it's also up to us - |
13 |
> users... |
14 |
> so I am trying. |
15 |
Indeed it is - communication is a two way process. |
16 |
|
17 |
> |
18 |
> I have grown up in a centrally planned economy and it was all about |
19 |
> regular meetings, summaries and named positions - those were used as |
20 |
> tools to improve things and they almost never worked as expected. |
21 |
Regular meetings provide records of decisions. For an organization such |
22 |
as the Foundation, that's important. Summaries save people reading the |
23 |
whole log when they only need to know the agreements reached. Named |
24 |
positions shows who is normally responsible for an activity. A first |
25 |
point of contact, if you like. |
26 |
|
27 |
> |
28 |
> For example these regular meetings you propose - if there is an issue |
29 |
> to talk about why wait until the regular meeting is held? Are there |
30 |
> no efficient and easy to use channels to communicate immediately? |
31 |
You can use this mailing list and join #gentoo-trustees. There is no |
32 |
need to wait for a meeting to start a discussion or raise an issue. |
33 |
The next meeting will ensure that trustees have a common view of the |
34 |
issue, record is progress in an easily accessible way and ensure its |
35 |
not forgotten. emails and ad-hoc IRC discussions are good for getting |
36 |
started but not for tracking progress and recording decisions. |
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
> If there is no issue to talk about - regular meeting would be just a |
40 |
> waste of time. |
41 |
I don't agree - these meetings ensure that everyone is aware and can |
42 |
participate fully in the decision making process. Trustees will be in |
43 |
several timezones - that is an issue for managing a virtual community |
44 |
such as Gentoo. |
45 |
|
46 |
> These institutional things make everything less efficient - and BTW - |
47 |
> they tend to get sooo boring and meaningless... The more non-formal, |
48 |
> immediate and 'not institutionalized' communication - the better. |
49 |
You need a balance between the formal, which produces formal records |
50 |
and the informal, that does not. |
51 |
|
52 |
> In (obviously not just) my opinion the problem is that Gentoo has |
53 |
> become too political, too rigid, too bureaucratic and institutional - |
54 |
I think the Gentoo council, which was set up to be a technical body is |
55 |
getting bogged down in politics from time to time, which impedes its |
56 |
technical decision making process. This is where the Gentoo Foundation |
57 |
can help, by taking on all the political aspects of our community. |
58 |
|
59 |
> and it seems to me that maybe you don't realize (maybe you have not |
60 |
> attended as many regular meetings as I have;-)) that you want to fix |
61 |
> things by making Gentoo even more bureaucratic, more institutional, |
62 |
> less flexible. |
63 |
I hope that's not the intent. My intent is to have the council and |
64 |
foundation work together such that the council does not spend its time |
65 |
on politics and is free to focus on technical things. This will lead to |
66 |
more flexible decision making. |
67 |
|
68 |
> |
69 |
> I think the solution is to go the exact opposite way - to make |
70 |
> structural changes and use technical tools (as Daniel Robbins wrote |
71 |
> about it) that would allow Gentoo to become more decentralized, |
72 |
> flexible, less formal, less political. Disassembling the cathedral a |
73 |
> little. |
74 |
I think there are some good ideas here. Gentoo has reached a size where |
75 |
central control can at best, only set a direction. It cannot manage |
76 |
details. Gentoo does have some of the structure in place for these |
77 |
things to happen - the separate projects and herds. |
78 |
Gentoo is in need of middle management - perhaps it can come from the |
79 |
Foundation. |
80 |
> |
81 |
> Competition of smaller projects led by developers who talk when they |
82 |
> need to instead of cathedral led by official institutions going |
83 |
> through official (and less and less efficient) ways. Smaller teams |
84 |
> who communicate on daily basis so they don't need summaries and |
85 |
> reports. |
86 |
That's fine for the individual projects but what about the wider |
87 |
community and the bigger projects that need to know what is happening |
88 |
to the projects that they use. In particular, I'm thinking of Release |
89 |
Engineering who are putting together the 2008.0 LiveCD. They need to |
90 |
know that the various parts will be ready on time. |
91 |
Users like to know whats happening too - how would that information be |
92 |
circulated without summaries and reports ? |
93 |
|
94 |
> |
95 |
> Allowing and promoting funny competition between smaller teams |
96 |
> instead of demotivating (because unsolvable) fights inside huge teams |
97 |
> frozen in official ways of doing things. |
98 |
I have never seen this - can you provide an example please ? |
99 |
|
100 |
> I have seen many developers leaving Gentoo because of fights - is it |
101 |
> necessary? |
102 |
I have seen some developers leave as a disagreement was the 'last |
103 |
straw' but never as sole reason. Often, real reasons for leaving are |
104 |
not made public. |
105 |
|
106 |
> There should be some way to use the conflict for Gentoo's |
107 |
> sake and developers' fun instead of never-ending discussions with |
108 |
> only one solution - less patient side of a dispute leaves Gentoo. |
109 |
Some technical discussions really do only have a single solution. |
110 |
|
111 |
> |
112 |
> Discussions are good but sometimes when there is too much of a need |
113 |
> to discuss things this tells us that there is something wrong and |
114 |
> there is a need for structural change. |
115 |
I hope the Foundation can facilitate changes like this. |
116 |
|
117 |
> I think Gentoo needs mechanism for teams to split up much more |
118 |
> easily - I mean... lets let the work do |
119 |
> the talking - if there is a disagreement in a team they should be |
120 |
> able to split up easily and compete - the better technical solution |
121 |
> wins and gets to the official tree - that's IMO more efficient and |
122 |
> more fun way than discussions. I have some kind of micro-forks |
123 |
> inside Gentoo on mind |
124 |
Like the portage, plaudis, pkgcore developments in progress at them |
125 |
moment perhaps ? |
126 |
|
127 |
> - I think that is what Gentoo should support |
128 |
> as much as possible |
129 |
> and Gentoo's infrastructure should be tailored to support it. |
130 |
> |
131 |
> To find the mechanism that would allow to maintain functionality of |
132 |
> Gentoo as whole, solve compatibility issues etc. without too much of |
133 |
> a huge organization that needs more and more energy to keep itself |
134 |
> going... writing summaries and attending meetings while there is less |
135 |
> and less time left to do the actual work - that is the problem. |
136 |
Its a question of balance. Producing the information needed to keep |
137 |
users and other developers informed without doing to much, at the same |
138 |
time making sure that enough paperwork is produced to be able to use |
139 |
the products made by developers and understand the decisions they made |
140 |
at sometime in the future, when changes need to be made. |
141 |
|
142 |
> |
143 |
> Thanx for your time reading this. |
144 |
> |
145 |
> Jan Bilek. |
146 |
> -- |
147 |
> gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |
148 |
> |
149 |
Thank you for writing. |
150 |
- -- |
151 |
Regards, |
152 |
|
153 |
Roy Bamford |
154 |
(NeddySeagoon) a member of |
155 |
gentoo-ops |
156 |
forum-mods |
157 |
treecleaners |
158 |
|
159 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
160 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) |
161 |
|
162 |
iD8DBQFHpQUpTE4/y7nJvasRAirhAJ9YEh2MU6MYjWi9Sjfz20NOrG52lQCfU280 |
163 |
t3XwYjXoiRj1FHHLYZ2IgfA= |
164 |
=lVve |
165 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
166 |
|
167 |
-- |
168 |
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |