[gentoo-project] Re: Serious problems with Gentoo Recruiting and returning developers

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

I originally tried to send this to list on the date and time listed
below. Which was a day before some other negative events transpired.
Turns out I was still banned from posting to all lists from events that
transpired back in 2008.

Very likely the other events have skewed others perceptions, but if all
knew the background story of what I have been dealing with in the past
year. Much less things that went on long ago. I think you can start to
sympathize a bit with my point of view, if you put yourself in my shoes.

On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 16:37 -0500, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> To begin with I have spent almost a year now trying by any means to
> rejoin Gentoo which still has not happened. While most any developer I
> have interacted with has been very supportive of such and encouraging my
> return. When it comes to Gentoo Recruiters, I have received only the
> opposite.
>
> Recruiting alone, along with the process of handling returning devs, has
> made it near impossible for me to rejoin. Even worse recruiting has
> driven me away a few times in the process. Which recruiting should never
> be responsible for making a new developer or returning developer want to
> quit or give up on the process.
>
> After completing my quizzes and waiting for three months last year, I
> gave up. At the time I was told by the lead recruiter, Petteri Räty,
> that there was a 20 person back log/queue for recruiters. Which I find
> that some what unacceptable, but I now know the real reason for the
> delay. Time is being wasted in the process and things being drug out
> much longer than they need to be. Which I recently experienced first
> hand yesterday.
>
> I accepted the back log/queue reason at the time, which has turned out
> to be an excuse. Despite being in regular communication with Petteri.
> Not to mention being in #gentoo-java a few times when there was a
> schedule team meeting an no one showed. I was around, and that time/hour
> could have been spent re-processing me and getting me back on board.
> However that was not the case.
>
> Since then the queue has gone away. But the new reason, or excuse that I
> get from Petteri is conflict of interest. He is Java Team lead, a team I
> will likely join, but many of my contributions have nothing to do with
> Java. Thus he felt a recruiter should not be on the same team or project
> as a new developer.
>
> I do not believe that is documented policy, and if it was would be
> incorrect logic. Sure its nice for a recruiter to have a neutral point
> of view. However if a recruiter has exposure to a new/returning
> developers activity. That will only give them greater knowledge as to
> the other persons skill level.
>
> I basically figured given the resistance and those with the power to
> process recruits being totally uncooperative. I had no choice by to give
> up on the effort. At least that was something, which is better than
> months of nothing. I did not want to wait for something that seemed it
> was never going to take place, might as well just give up. Not like I
> got any encouragement to be patient.
>
> Now as I was contributing things over the holidays, another dev I was
> attempting to proxying stuff through, or reopened my developer bug.
> Which I did not have a problem with. I would like to rejoin if there was
> a reasonable way to do that without wasting a ton of time. It seemed
> after which some progress was being made. Thomas Sachau was interacting
> with me in #gentoo-java, and stepped up to do what Petteri basically
> refuses to do, process me as a recruit.
>
> Which is some what funny, because to join the Java team, there is a
> third quiz, beyond the two normal developers must take. The only
> recruiter who can review a Java quiz is Petteri. Which speaking of the
> Java Quiz there are several questions that are out of date. I brought
> that up a few times, and was told I could/should go correct it as a
> user. However today it was brought up in #gentoo-java by another who is
> seeking to become a gentoo developer. Petteri responded I will go
> correct the quizzes, which was not the same response given to me on
> several occasions.
>
> Despite the resistance and all the rest. I kept focused and doing what
> was necessary in order to get back on board. I was following up with
> Thomas as to when we could set a time. When it got close to that, Thomas
> started preaching to me about not getting myself into situations like
> the past. Which I felt was uncalled for, and the past should be left
> where it is. Now that comment brought about a slew of discussions that
> Thomas did not like. Mostly because I dislike devrel, and both Petteri
> and Thomas are part of devrel. If not directly then by association with
> recruiters project falling under devrel.
>
> Finally yesterday I got to the point of quiz review. Which prior to
> that, Thomas had made several comments about us not completing review in
> one sessions. Which I mentioned to him several times, I did it in one
> session before with my old recruiter,Bryan Ostergaard. At a time when I
> was new, knew less, and had no experience. The second time around should
> be much faster than the first, only a few questions changed on the
> quizzes. But it seems Thomas had it set in his mind that it would take
> more than one session.
>
> Unfortunately that was the case, and after spending 2hrs in review
> yesterday with Thomas, we did not make it past 10b on the first quiz.
> Which I find completely unacceptable. Now Thomas puts the delay solely
> on me, accepting no blame or fault on his behalf, that I was complaining
> through out the process. Which there were some complaints, but that was
> not the reason for it taking 2hrs. We should have blown through the
> first 10 questions on the first quiz, much less completed review of both
> quizzes in 2hrs.
>
> Now i was trying to make the log of the session public by attaching it
> to my developer bug. Not to give out quiz answers or to disrespect the
> recruiting process as others might see things. Despite how recruiters
> have disrespected me on several occasions. But to shed light on a major
> problem. Also so others can form their own opinion as to why it took
> 2hrs to cover 10 questions. Which were not the most complex questions of
> the 3 quizzes that needed to be reviewed.
>
> On top of it all I am really amazed at how many bugs are open since I
> left. Several bugs were open before I left and remain that way today.
> Most any package I maintained is still without a maintainer, and I have
> a huge mess to clean up and tons of work to do. All of which I would
> have and should have done long ago. For past reasons I rather not bring
> up again.
>
> One might think recruiting would take the amount of work that is not
> getting done that I will get done into consideration. In discussions
> with Thomas and Petteri I pointed out several times, that I was not
> suffering from not being a Gentoo Developer. But in fact Gentoo has
> suffered in many ways. Not only with more open bugs and no maintainer on
> several packages I maintained. But in many other areas, no monthly
> newsletter, no tax return for the foundation, no new recruits for the
> java team, etc. The list goes on and on.
>
> I do not feel recruiting is doing whats in Gentoo's own best interest to
> get new or returning developers up and running as soon as possible, and
> with the least amount of obstacles. I have no idea why Gentoo goes out
> of its way to make things more difficult than they need to be. There is
> not enough time for all things that need to be done to get done across
> the board. The only way for that ever to change is with increasing the
> amount of people and simplifying the process, complexity and delays are
> not beneficial.
>
> However some feel that its best to have less people that are capable of
> more. While thats a valid argument, it doesn't hold much water. If that
> were true, Gentoo would not be behind in any way. Nor would Gentoo need
> or have any benefit for new developers, since everything that needs to
> be done is getting done or done. Till that is the case, Gentoo needs to
> focus on amount of developers, quantity over quality. Ever day there are
> more FOSS projects and applications, only way for Gentoo to keep up is
> with numbers.
>
> For the time being I will not provide any logs or links to facts that
> re-enforce my comments. I am doing such out of respect for other
> developers wishes and the community as a whole, for now. However I feel
> at some point that stuff will have to be exposed to truly shed light on
> the matter.
>
> In the end a few should not hold back many like this. There are many
> users suffering, things that need to be done, and recruiting, a few
> Gentoo Developers are standing in the way of this. Thus I question any
> harm that might result from making private sensitive information public.
> Given the harm others are doing thats going some what unnoticed, but
> surely visible and felt by users. Gentoo is suffering either way. I
> would rather get it all out there now, hit rock bottom sooner than
> later, and get back to making things better.
>
> The current status quo is not acceptable, IMHO.
>


-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.
Obsidian-Studios, Inc.
http://www.obsidian-studios.com

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is
protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should
delete this message.

Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking
of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.