Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Daniel Robbins <drobbins@××××××.org>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2017 16:53:56
Message-Id: CAPDOV4-uBnQb9CwYzL3Npi2xAPO7He66+ABFCk2uPBEY5Ac0NQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo by "Andreas K. Huettel"
1 HI Andreas,
2
3 I am guessing the 'oldtimers' where the ones who sort of took control after
4 I left, in which case, I agree -- Gentoo absolutely needs to be egalitarian
5 in its approach and consistent in its policies. While the one-BDFL model
6 *might* be a project structure that can work (it works for Funtoo, but
7 likely not Gentoo -- certainly not now) -- when you have a horde of "little
8 BDFLs", they are their own little ruling clique that answers to no one, and
9 you effectively don't have a functioning internal structure -- just a
10 divide -- and the resulting angst. It sucks. And I understand how wltjr
11 mentioning Seemant brings visions of the "old days" (really, Seemant and I
12 were the 'original dudes' and not the 'oldtimers' you speak of) and that
13 can get people feeling sketchy about going back to the 'dark ages' or
14 trying to impose me as BDFL on the project (I know that wltjr has fantasies
15 of this, and it's something I don't want. But me being more involved with
16 Gentoo... that's something that is positive and we can discuss.)
17
18 As for my involvement, here is what I think makes sense. As Roy points out,
19 Gentoo is where it is, with the rules it has. These rules must be accepted
20 and respected. We must build on what currently exists, to respect those who
21 have invested in and lived within the metastructure. I have sensed a great
22 deal of goodwill from numerous people on the Gentoo side related to
23 positive and friendly collaboration. I want to build on that.
24
25 I am making myself available to assist in some way. What I think makes
26 sense is the following (view this as a proposal, expressed in list form...)
27
28 1. The council invites me to participate in all council discussions and
29 meetings, and effectively treats me as a non-voting member. I'd propose a
30 council vote to give me a permanent status of a non-voting member, maybe
31 with some exception that I can be kicked out for a year at a time if a
32 majority of the council can demonstrate and vote that I am regularly being
33 disruptive or some such thing. This provides an open invitation from the
34 council for my positive contribution to the project. We can then
35 legitimately say that 'Daniel is back and helping out Gentoo!' --
36 satisfying those who want that (both the BDFL fantasizers and those who are
37 legitimately just happy that I'm back helping) and gives me the regular
38 exposure to various issues so I can get familiar with where I can help out
39 the project most effectively. I am not a magical solution to problems -- I
40 am making myself available to try to understand and help, and get involved
41 as it makes sense, and this requires regular exposure to the current
42 challenges and opportunities. This would make that possible.
43
44 2. I look at running for a seat on the council in the coming elections.
45 If I run and am elected, I would then of course be a voting member of the
46 council. The experience gained from item #1 would provide me with enough of
47 a clue so if I were elected (I figure I have a good shot), I would be
48 familiar with the existing processes of the council and the current
49 challenges and thus would be able to be a positive voting contributor to
50 the council rather than a distraction. Thus, if this were to happen, there
51 will be much less uncertainty and drama and much more continuity.
52
53 3. I will continue to work with members of the Gentoo dev team on various
54 development-related projects. If, for running for council, I am required to
55 be a Gentoo developer, I can go through the recruitment process. However, I
56 am frankly happy working with Gentoo developers as I am doing now and I
57 feel like it is less likely to cause problems if I do NOT have direct
58 commit access to Gentoo repos. So maybe the council could vote an exception
59 to my need to have access to the Gentoo repos. I think this would make it
60 easier for everyone -- people would not need to worry that I would subvert
61 existing processes. And I see no reason why I need direct commit access.
62 (Side-note: Maybe this is a model for the future -- have the most senior
63 old-timers 'graduate' to non-direct-commit roles so they cannot subvert the
64 process and thus are forced to work with existing teams. In effect, a kind
65 of 'term limit' -- force them spread their wings and use GitHub like
66 everyone else as they already have enough clout to get people to look at
67 their code.)
68
69 I think the process above would make my re-involvement with the project as
70 uneventful as possible, and most likely to be perceived as positive by all
71 stake-holders. (Council, devs, users, BDFL worshippers, etc.) Approached
72 this way, there isn't any real ambiguity or drama about what my role is and
73 how that relates to the roles of others, and I am letting people know ahead
74 of time about my intention to run for council. Then hopefully we can focus
75 on bigger issues like actually making Gentoo better and more fun :)
76
77 Let me know what you think.
78
79 Best Regards,
80
81 Daniel
82
83 On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:09 AM, Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@g.o>
84 wrote:
85
86 > Hi Daniel,
87 >
88 > > First, Seemant is a fantastic guy and Gentoo would benefit greatly from
89 > his
90 > > return. He was an incredible asset on the project.
91 >
92 > Sure, sounds like a good idea, if he wants to.
93 >
94 > > I am happy to get more involved with Gentoo. I've actually been working
95 > > with several Gentoo devs on several development-related things and plan
96 > to
97 > > continue to do so informally.
98 >
99 > Sounds also like a good idea. Feel free to get in touch with the
100 > recruiters.
101 >
102 > > I do think Gentoo could benefit from some positive energy and some
103 > > additional support for development. I would like to assist with this
104 > > effort.
105 >
106 > A significant part of the "negative energy" comes from a generation
107 > conflict.
108 >
109 > Strongly simplifying, we had "oldtimers" who were used to organically grown
110 > rules (see games team, which by force of tradition ignored QA and council),
111 > and we had the "new" developers like me, who were recruited over the years
112 > according to developed procedures and were told to stick to rules. That
113 > led to
114 > effectively two classes of developers, with more and more increasing
115 > clashes.
116 > Devrel, mostly consisting of people who were around a long time, was not
117 > helpful. What happened eventually that the oldtimers were so much in the
118 > minority that they got overruled more and more. See games team, which was
119 > dissolved by the council, and see toolchain, which was basically completely
120 > abandoned for a year before re-forming with new people.
121 >
122 > We are finally reaching the point where "new" people have a significant
123 > say in
124 > Gentoo, and where rules apply the same to every dev and there are not a
125 > selected few exempt. Which has already improved the overall mood a lot.
126 >
127 > How do you want to contribute to this improvement?
128 >
129 > > I think we do need to reach out to Google, who seems to have a habit of
130 > > poaching our developers, and work out some kind of arrangement of
131 > > cooperation. The sum total of stuff I've received from Google has been a
132 > > prototype Chromebook, a $50 prepaid VISA card, and a google blanket. No,
133 > I
134 > > am not making this up. I know these items were sent to me with the
135 > > intention of saying thanks, and meant as the kindest of gestures -- but
136 > > certainly, there are better ways for us to support one another?
137 >
138 > I'm seeing this critical. OK I'm probably one of the few persons here who
139 > is
140 > not hoping to get recruited by Google at some point. However...
141 >
142 > One of the side effects of Google poaching our developers was that we
143 > ended up
144 > with some mystery changes in core Gentoo stuff that noone ever explained,
145 > and
146 > that possibly were added to support ChromeOS. Now, there's nothing wrong
147 > with
148 > being cooperative. What is wrong is smuggling stuff in under the radar.
149 > Disclaimer, I can't prove any of this, but a few times I had a rather odd
150 > feeling.
151 >
152 > And please don't listen too much to wltjr. Most of us stop reading a
153 > mailing
154 > list thread as soon as he is involved.
155 >
156 > Cheers,
157 > Andreas
158 >
159 >
160 > --
161 > Andreas K. Hüttel
162 > dilfridge@g.o
163 > Gentoo Linux developer
164 > (council, toolchain, perl, libreoffice, comrel)
165 >
166 >

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo "Christopher Díaz Riveros" <chrisadr@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o>