| 1 |
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 4:39 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I want all our users to be happy. I want every single one of them to |
| 5 |
> get the distro they want to have. I want our users to have a distro |
| 6 |
> with no directories with "systemd" in the name. I want our users to |
| 7 |
> have a distro where every application is well-integrated with systemd. |
| 8 |
> I want our users to not be exposed to packages that may break. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
There is a serious ethical problem with saying "I care about |
| 12 |
_insert_group_name_here_, but I don't want them to vote." Let's apply this |
| 13 |
same logic to women, or to black people. Does it make sense in that |
| 14 |
context? What if I came back, took over control of Gentoo, and said this |
| 15 |
same thing about developers? I care about you being happy, but you no |
| 16 |
longer have a voice. Maybe some would be OK with having a BDFL back, but a |
| 17 |
large percentage of developers would be outraged. Why? Because they |
| 18 |
wouldn't buy this line of reasoning. It creates an ethical dilemma and |
| 19 |
moral hazard (see principal agent problem: |
| 20 |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_problem ). How do you |
| 21 |
know you are actually "caring" about the disenfranchised group if they |
| 22 |
don't have a voice? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
User representation absolutely needs to exist. When I led the project, it |
| 25 |
was entrusted to me. I entrusted it to the trustees. If the Council is now |
| 26 |
making technical decisions, there needs to be some user representation here |
| 27 |
as well. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
What I have proposed accomplishes this, and protects developers from |
| 30 |
unproductive direct user interaction, which frustrates users and developers |
| 31 |
alike. Again, here's how it works. Users vote and elect trustees, who |
| 32 |
_appoint_ User Representatives, who in turn _can be Gentoo developers_ and |
| 33 |
have the skills to work constructively with other developers, who sit on |
| 34 |
the council in a _non-majority_ position and have the ability to represent |
| 35 |
user interests. Users will be represented in a way that is constructive, |
| 36 |
compatible with internal Gentoo development culture and provides valuable |
| 37 |
feedback to the project as a whole. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
I have not taken a position on the gentoo-dev mailing list restriction |
| 40 |
because I know that unproductive conversations or ranting from users can be |
| 41 |
incredibly distracting and unproductive. It's a lose-lose situation. I get |
| 42 |
that. That is not what we are talking about here. Direct user feedback |
| 43 |
needs to be received by User Representatives who in turn can coordinate |
| 44 |
productively with ongoing Gentoo development efforts. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Being a meta-distribution, Gentoo is an amorphous blob of cool technology. |
| 47 |
As developers, we hack away on it hoping that it will be useful to someone |
| 48 |
besides us in doing something that they want to do too. We appreciate the |
| 49 |
flexibility it offers us and want to offer this flexibility to others as |
| 50 |
well. It is very important to have these people who are using Gentoo to be |
| 51 |
able to provide constructive feedback on their experiences with what we |
| 52 |
have created. You no longer have a BDFL to provide leadership and assess |
| 53 |
the needs of the outside world, so this is doubly needed. Otherwise Gentoo |
| 54 |
development can become very insular, in-grown and detached from reality. |
| 55 |
This actually allows for a situation to exist where there is a lot of |
| 56 |
internal drama, debate and angst between developers as there is no clear |
| 57 |
focus for the project and it becomes difficult to assess what to focus on. |
| 58 |
While you may view user representation as a threat to Gentoo development |
| 59 |
efforts, when done right it is actually going to be a refreshing change |
| 60 |
that brings a new calmness and focus to the project and also provides a |
| 61 |
much-needed positive feedback loop. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
You bring up a point that volunteers should be able to work on whatever |
| 64 |
they want, without being 'forced' to do what users want. This will still be |
| 65 |
true. If a dev doesn't want to work on something, they won't work on |
| 66 |
something. Assuming no existing devs want to work on areas of user |
| 67 |
interest, at least we will be tracking areas that users would like us to |
| 68 |
work on, and new devs can be recruited who want to work on these areas. My |
| 69 |
personal opinion is that devs aren't this "black and white" -- some stuff |
| 70 |
will get whittled away on happily, other stuff may languish, but then we'll |
| 71 |
be looking for new devs to handle these areas. The idea that somehow |
| 72 |
volunteer devs will be forced to work on stuff they don't want to work on |
| 73 |
is just not going to happen. We couldn't make it happen if even if we |
| 74 |
wanted to. That's not how free (and gratis, volunteer) software development |
| 75 |
works. |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
I hope this helps you to understand my position on the importance of user |
| 78 |
representation in Gentoo. It is very important: ethically, legally, and |
| 79 |
just to make the project better. |
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
-Daniel |
Archives