| 1 |
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 1:34 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. |
| 3 |
> <wlt-ml@××××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> On Monday, October 3, 2016 12:16:47 PM EDT Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> > # of developers recruited |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> Comrel doesn't recruit developers, so this is a bit meaningless. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> They are related projects, both under the same Community Resources |
| 11 |
>> project. 3 |
| 12 |
>> of 5 recruiters are members of comrel. |
| 13 |
>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:ComRes |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> The number of new developers is very important relating to the |
| 16 |
>> number that |
| 17 |
>> may |
| 18 |
>> have been driven away, either kicked out, or like me motivated to |
| 19 |
>> retired/ |
| 20 |
>> resign. Or had action taken against them. |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> If say comrel took action against 5 in a year, and say 10 were |
| 23 |
>> recruited. That |
| 24 |
>> is bad stats for Gentoo as a whole. If more are being effected by |
| 25 |
>> comrel than |
| 26 |
>> recruited in a year even worse. Again that is very important |
| 27 |
>> information to |
| 28 |
>> know. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> This assumes that what is good for Gentoo is more developers, and what |
| 31 |
> is bad for Gentoo is less developers. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> By that argument we shouldn't have Comrel at all, and we should give |
| 34 |
> dev access to anybody who asks for it. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> The criteria Comrel should be judged on is whether it is correctly |
| 37 |
> apply the Code of Conduct. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> While I certainly would prefer to see developers change their behavior |
| 40 |
> than see them be kicked out, I'd rather see them be kicked out than |
| 41 |
> see them continue their previous behavior if it is egregious. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
I see a good opportunity to make an analogy here. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Gentoo is a strawberry field that makes strawberry jam. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Developers are the plants. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
Users are the happy customers of the field who put strawberry jam on |
| 50 |
their toast every morning when they use a gentoo system. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
Recruiters are the guys who go to the seed market, sift through the |
| 53 |
supplies, and find the best, healthiest seeds to plant in the field. |
| 54 |
They are the farmers. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
Comrel is the undertaker that applies pesticides and if necessary |
| 57 |
uproots bad plants. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Now, I think both roles are important. However, for the field to grow, |
| 60 |
there must, by sheer mathematical logic, be more strawberries being |
| 61 |
planted than strawberries being uprooted. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
Comrel can, and must, continue to weed out bad developers who are |
| 64 |
hurting the project with toxic behavior. The users who are eating |
| 65 |
their toast in the morning don't want rotten berries in their jam. |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
However, if there's a shortage of jam (bugs being neglected, new |
| 68 |
packages being sluggish on uptake) then we need more developers to |
| 69 |
handle the workload. And if the strawberry field is thin, we need more |
| 70 |
farmers (recruiters) to plant more strawberries. |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
Considering we have only 5 recruiters, 3 of which were cited as also |
| 73 |
being comrel members...I have a hunch we have a manpower issue, and we |
| 74 |
should get more recruiters. As a developer-in-the-making myself I've |
| 75 |
felt the frustration this has caused. I personally do not think 5 |
| 76 |
recruiters is enough, especially if 3 of them have a conflict of duty |
| 77 |
where their time is divided with comrel tasks instead of recruiting. My |
| 78 |
personal opinion is that, barring the synergy of having a person |
| 79 |
skilled in both, that members of comrel should not also be members of |
| 80 |
recruiters unless their dual posting is accounted for in terms of a |
| 81 |
manpower census. |
| 82 |
|
| 83 |
>>> But, if this isn't the case it could also be a useful metric. My |
| 84 |
>>> sense is that Comrel doesn't actually resolve that many cases. |
| 85 |
>> |
| 86 |
>> That has been my main point since 2008. An entity that should |
| 87 |
>> resolve |
| 88 |
>> problems, instead creates them, and makes them much bigger and |
| 89 |
>> worse. That is |
| 90 |
>> my assumption, but facts can show one way or another. I hope I am |
| 91 |
>> wrong, but |
| 92 |
>> if I am right... |
| 93 |
|
| 94 |
As I cited, I don't think that comrel is causing a problem on its own. |
| 95 |
As long as the people comrel ejects are indeed bad developers, they |
| 96 |
need to go anyway. |
| 97 |
|
| 98 |
The gentoo farm may have a shortage of jam, but just like Applejack's |
| 99 |
cider from Sweet Apple Acres, there's a reputation of quality that has |
| 100 |
to be preserved at pretty much all costs. Taking shortcuts by easing |
| 101 |
comrel off its human resources QA task is not the right answer. |
| 102 |
|
| 103 |
If comrel is weeding out good developers though, that IS a problem. |
| 104 |
|
| 105 |
No, I don't know if this is actually the case |
| 106 |
|
| 107 |
> By the time Comrel steps in a problem already exists. |
| 108 |
> |
| 109 |
> And by resolving I meant driving to a conclusion. Ideally that |
| 110 |
> conclusion is that people are behaving nicely. However, a situation |
| 111 |
> where somebody who does not demonstrate a change in behavior is |
| 112 |
> removed is a resolution. |
| 113 |
> |
| 114 |
> -- |
| 115 |
> Rich |
| 116 |
> |
Archives