Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council 2016 / 2017 election

[Daniel Campbell]

On 06/18/2016 05:59 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Daniel Campbell <zlg@g.o> wrote:
>>
>> The less admin/bureaucratic overhead we have, the better. From what I
>> gather even the Council feels this way, but that's just my two cents.
>>
>
> ++
>
> Certainly I feel this way.  I'd say that most of m peers would agree.
> Not that this ultimately matters since for the next two weeks the
> final say in what the council should be really rests with the
> developers.
>
> This topic has come up before.  If you actually look at what powers
> the council has in practice they are:
> 1.  Approve GLEPs.
> 2.  Appeals for comrel actions.
> 3.  Resolve disagreements within the community (such as between projects, etc).
>
> The ability for the council itself to actually get anything done is
> purely dependent on how much its members want to spend their time
> doing it themselves.  The council doesn't actually have the power to
> make anybody do anything.  It does have the power to prevent somebody
> from doing something, and to pick a side in a dispute to settle it.
> For example, there was a dispute over how games should be managed, and
> the Council decided that developers could form a new games project if
> they wished, or maintain games outside of the project, and that it was
> not necessary to use the games eclass or follow the previous games
> project policies.  What the Council can't actually do is force
> somebody to go in and modify all the games ebuilds to stop using the
> eclass.  Maybe we could have all the games that use the eclass
> treecleaned, but that would be like swatting a fly with a howitzer.
> So, until somebody wants to actually implement the changes we're left
> with the status quo.  However, nobody is actually complaining about
> the status quo, so it can't be that bad.  Indeed, if somebody thought
> it was bad, they'd just fix it, and with the council decisions in hand
> nobody could interfere with their work.
>
> Ultimately that is the practical role of the council.  If there is
> something you want to do in Gentoo, then DO IT.  And if somebody gets
> in your way, the Council can get them out of your way, or help find a
> middle way that lets everybody accomplish their goals.
>
> When it comes down to actually leading initiatives, well, we already
> have GLEP 39 which basically says that anybody can do it.  You don't
> need to be on the Council to make a big project happen.  You just need
> to appeal to devs to contribute.  If your appeal falls on deaf ears,
> trust me, being on the council isn't going to make it go any better.
> To the degree that any of us have sway in the community we had it
> before we ever joined the council, and maintain it apart from our
> participation in the council.
>
> Now, if you view the Council as a badge of honor or something to be
> put on a resume, then I certainly can understand frustration when
> people with low commit rates/etc or low rates of making big proposals
> aren't on the Council.  However, if you view the role of the Council
> as running interference for the people who really are getting the work
> done, then you might appreciate that it isn't always beneficial to
> have the Council buried in implementing portage enhancements or
> whatever.  Often "calmer heads" is one of the more important
> attributes, as well as technical competence.
>
> Oh, and a willingness to write up meeting summaries never hurts.  :)
>
Thanks for the thorough explanation; my thoughts were pretty much right
in line with that, and I think it's for the better. It gives 'power' to
those who want to do the work or are willing to come up with workable
solutions that suit most or all people involved.

A great example is the recent USE_EXPAND="gui" or L10N. Some people want
these changes to happen, but are tackling real world problems at the
same time as some bike-shedding so that the ideas can build and evolve
into something suitable. I think some view situations like those as
make-it-or-break-it deals, and perhaps that stalls discussions and
steers them in less-productive directions. It's my hope that the council
doesn't need to get involved, because the entire consequence of
collaboration is we're going to have to find practical solutions that
fix as many issues for as many people possible without taking away
options. Few distros can do that; the ones who can are mostly based on
Gentoo in the first place.

So I guess maybe our protracted discussions and "slowness" is a good thing.

-- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6