Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Daniel Robbins <drobbins@××××××.org>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Cc: Gentoo Development <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>, council@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Social Contract, Council: please fix the mess you cause
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:55:27
Message-Id: CAPDOV48if3uVAUsTonchNZtd33RfyOWbNn5QQ2FOuvf6ObgF9w@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Social Contract, Council: please fix the mess you cause by "Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike)"
1 Hey klondike,
2
3 I am looking at the social contract and the only place that
4 gentoo-dev@l.g.o is in the introductory paragraph:
5
6 "This social contract is intended to clearly describe the overall
7 development policies and standards of the Gentoo project development team.
8 Parts of this document have been derived from the Debian Social Contract.
9 It is generally very similar to it except that certain parts have been
10 clarified and augmented while other parts deemed redundant have been
11 removed. Comments are welcome. Please send them to our
12 gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list."
13
14 It's not actually in the social contract itself.
15
16 At one point, maybe these last three sentences of the intro paragraph were
17 appropriate, like when the social contract was a new thing and more of a
18 work in progress.
19
20 I would recommend the following changes. Replace the last three sentences
21 of the introductory paragraph with something similar to the following:
22
23 "Potential improvements to the social contract should be submitted to the
24 Gentoo Linux bug tracker at https://bugs.funtoo.org, and assigned to
25 gentoo-trustees. Specific questions about social contract, and discussion
26 about potential future improvements can be posted to the gentoo-project
27 mailing list."
28
29 This is fair. First, it removes an attribution to Debian. I think our
30 social contract has evolved to the point where it's now its own thing?
31 (Maybe I'm wrong on this point) And it tightens up the wording to make it
32 clear that our social contract is not in a "hey -- tell us what you think"
33 stage. And yet we do have a clear process for formal changes (bug tracker)
34 and general discussion and questions (gentoo-project).
35
36 -Daniel
37
38 On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) <
39 klondike@g.o> wrote:
40
41 > Dear Gentoo Council,
42 >
43 > During the meeting you held on December (see the logs here:
44 > https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20171210.txt ), you
45 > voted for restricting the gentoo-dev mailing list. Although in said meeting
46 > somebody raised that such a change affected the Gentoo Social Contract as
47 > it referred users to provide comments on the gentoo-dev mailing list (see
48 > https://www.gentoo.org/get-started/philosophy/social-contract.html ) this
49 > was dismissed by one of your members (which has, in the past, called the
50 > Gentoo Social Contract "dead law") by saying that the right place to send
51 > such comments is gentoo-project (but willingly ignoring that such a
52 > reference has been part of it since the first archived draft version
53 > https://web.archive.org/web/20021112053724/http://www.
54 > gentoo.org:80/main/en/contract.xml and the first non draft version
55 > https://web.archive.org/web/20031203222653/http://www.
56 > gentoo.org:80/main/en/contract.xml which predate the gentoo-project
57 > mailing list) and apparently ignored by the rest.
58 >
59 > This was noted after the vote had happened and to the best of my knowledge
60 > hadn't been raised before. Despite that, on the next meeting where the
61 > topic was discussed a different council member stated that said person did
62 > not "any pertinent new information since last vote".
63 >
64 > Now, three months after, no action has been carried by the council on this
65 > very specific regard despite being made aware of it. This clearly shows
66 > that the current council members not only take hastened decissions without
67 > even doing propper research, they don't try to clean up the mess they cause
68 > after their own decissions.
69 >
70 > Given the inaction by the council, I'm propossing to apply either of these
71 > two changes to the Gentoo Social contract.
72 >
73 > First propossal:
74 > Replace "Comments are welcome. Please send them to our
75 > gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list." by "Comments by selected
76 > people are welcome. Please send them to our gentoo-dev@l.g.o
77 > mailing list.". Which clearly reflects the new ivory tower philosophy the
78 > Council is making the Gentoo Project take.
79 >
80 > Second propossal:
81 > Replace "Comments are welcome. Please send them to our
82 > gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list." by "Comments by selected
83 > people are welcome. Please send them to our gentoo-project@lists.
84 > gentoo.org mailing list CCing the Gentoo Foundation trustees on
85 > trustees@l.g.o.". Which ensures trustees get a notification of
86 > such propossals and still keeps the social contract open to comments for
87 > anybody.
88 >
89 > Please note, in the spirit of the second propossal I'm CCing
90 > gentoo-project.
91 >
92 > Klondike
93 >

Replies