[gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Daniel Drake]

Please keep future information regarding this poll public on gentoo-dev or
similar.

[publicising on gentoo-dev with permission from Grant Goodyear]

Dear all,
  Polls are open for the metastructure reform vote.  All Gentoo developers are
eligible to vote.

The proposals up for vote:

- The "FOSDEM" proposal
  http://dev.gentoo.org/~plate/fosdem-proposal.xml

- Koon's "Alternative" proposal
  http://dev.gentoo.org/~koon/metastructure.xml

- G2boojum's "Oldschool-small" proposal
  http://dev.gentoo.org/~g2boojum/proposal.html
  with a small council (7-13 members)

- G2boojum's "Oldschool-large" proposal
  http://dev.gentoo.org/~g2boojum/proposal.html
  with a large council (such as 0.1*Ndevs + (Ndevs+1)%2 members)

- Ciaranm's "Oldschool-small-with-slacker-boot"
  http://dev.gentoo.org/~g2boojum/proposal.html
  with a small council (7-13 members), and with :
  http://dev.gentoo.org/~spb/ciaranm-slacker-boot-proposal.txt
- Ciaranm's "Oldschool-large-with-slacker-boot"
  http://dev.gentoo.org/~g2boojum/proposal.html
  with a large council (such as 0.1*Ndevs + (Ndevs+1)%2 members)
  and with :
  http://dev.gentoo.org/~spb/ciaranm-slacker-boot-proposal.txt

- Keep the current system ("Keep-current")
  http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/index.xml
  http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=1&chap=5

- Reopen nominations ("Reopen-nominations")

- Form a task force for additional study ("Task-Force")
  -core mail (7 June 2005) from jstubbs, 42A4D555.7010009@gentoo.org
  (will be available on gentoo-dev as a response to this message)




[adapted from Thierry Carrez' mail]

Fellow Gentoo developers:

The metastructure poll is now open. Here you will find the details of
the election procedure. This is adapted from Aron Griffis' thorough
explanation on how to vote.

Poll subject
------------

You have to choose your preferred metastructure model(s) for Gentoo. The
metastructure is how projects/teams are organized and about the
existence and nature of an upper decision body. The candidate proposals
(and the "shortnames" we use in the election) have been presented in
Grant's opening email.

Election method
---------------

We are using the Condorcet method to tabulate votes and choose the
winners.  The Condorcet method is widely viewed as superior to the
traditional plurality method since it allows voters more power to
express preferences, and encourages voting truthfully instead of
siding with an apparently strong candidate.

Here is the nutshell explanation of the Condorcet method.  If you just
want the general concept of how winners are chosen, this might be
enough (quoted from electionmethods.org):

    In the Condorcet election method, voters rank the candidates in
    order of preference. The vote counting procedure then takes into
    account each preference of each voter for one candidate over
    another. It does so by conceptually breaking the election down
    into a series of separate races between each possible pairing of
    candidates, hence it is sometimes referred to as a "pairwise"
    method. If one of the candidates beats each of the other
    candidates in their one-on-one race, then that candidate wins.
    Otherwise, the result is ambiguous and a standard procedure is
    used to resolve the ambiguity. Unlike conventional plurality
    voting, Condorcet voting gives voters little incentive to falsify
    their true preferences.

There exist a number of algorithms to implement a Condorcet election.
For our election, we will use "Cloneproof Schwartz Sequential
Dropping" to resolve ambiguities.  This algorithm is in use by
a number of other free software projects, including Debian, Software
in the Public Interest, and UserLinux.

If you'd like more explanation than is provided by the quote above,
please take a look at the following links:

    http://electionmethods.org/CondorcetEx.htm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloneproof_Schwartz_Sequential_Dropping

Election Period
---------------

The election has started on Tue June 7 00:00 UTC and runs for a week,
closing on Mon June 13 23:59 UTC. Please vote as early as you feel
comfortable so that any unanticipated technical difficulties can be
resolved before the end of the election.

Election Corpus
---------------

All current Gentoo developers (active during the election period) are
allowed to vote.

How to vote
-----------

We are using dev.gentoo.org to collect ballots this year.  The
procedure is as follows:

    $ votify --new metastructure2005

This will generate a ballot for you, ~/.ballot-metastructure2005
The order of the candidates is randomized in each ballot.  The next
step is to edit the ballot with your favorite editor.  You will find
the following instructions at the top of the ballot:

# This is a ballot for the metastructure2005 election.
# Please rank your choices in order; first choice at the top and last choice at
# the bottom.  You can put choices on the same line to indicate no preference
# between them.  Any choices you omit from this file are implicitly added at the
# end.
#
# When you're finished editing this, the next step is to verify your ballot
# with:
#
#   votify --verify metastructure2005
#
# When that passes and you're satisfied, the final step is to submit your vote:
#
#   votify --submit metastructure2005
#

Notes
-----

- The four election officials are:
  Aron Griffis (agriffis)
  Grant Goodyear (g2boojum)
  Thierry Carrez (koon)
  Olivier Crete (tester)

  The presence of more than one election official is intended to ensure
  integrity in the counting process.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Daniel Drake]

Daniel Drake wrote:
> - Form a task force for additional study ("Task-Force")
>   -core mail (7 June 2005) from jstubbs, 42A4D555.7010009@gentoo.org
>   (will be available on gentoo-dev as a response to this message)

Jason Stubbs' proposal:

I'm past this deadline, but I'd like to propose a modified "keeping it the way
it works (fails) now". My motivation is that I don't feel any of these
proposals will solve the issues at hand in the long run. You may call it
`Jstubbs' "Task Force" proposal`.  ;)

At the outset I will explicitly state what seems to be implicit in the other
proposals. If this proposal is allowed to be entered into the ballot and ends
up being ranked highest, a ballot on the positions of top-level managers
would ensue. The number of positions and the projects would remain the same
in the short term.

The "Task Force" part of the proposal is that a new top level project be
created to specifically deal with how the organization functions. Its role
would be to document and improve all structure, policies and procedures.
However, it would have no power to enforce them. All policies and procedures
must be signed off on by the top-level managers for them to become
enforcable. For this reason, the task force would not be represented within
the top-level managers. Think of it as the organizational ombudsman.

In the short term, the goals would be to get policies and procedures
documented and approved that prevent stagnation within the top-level
managers. The main aim here being the ability to transition to one of the
proposals above or to some entirely different structure should documentation
prove it to be appropriate.

Medium term goals would be to step in and help other projects get their
procedures documented where need be. And in the long term, the aim would be
to have policies and procedures documented for everything.

Just to quickly preempt the main negative to this proposal, policies and
procedures don't mean you have to behave like a robot. Policies are only ever
a recommendation that serve to create a common direction. Procedures are only
ever a list of steps that are known to work. They are more of a safety net
than anything else. In either case, if you follow it and stuff up - even
badly - it is a fault of the policy or procedure.

And no, I don't have a name for the project yet although, looking back at the
projects page, I think I've just describe what the existing "metastructure"
project *should* be doing. So... worth putting on the ballot?

Regards,
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Paul Waring]

On 6/8/05, Daniel Drake <dsd@gentoo.org> wrote:
>   Polls are open for the metastructure reform vote.  All Gentoo developers are
> eligible to vote.

Any particular reason why Gentoo users are not allowed to have a say?

Paul

-- 
Rogue Tory
http://www.roguetory.org.uk

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Patrick Lauer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 424 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 16:22 +0100, Paul Waring wrote:
> On 6/8/05, Daniel Drake <dsd@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >   Polls are open for the metastructure reform vote.  All Gentoo developers are
> > eligible to vote.
> 
> Any particular reason why Gentoo users are not allowed to have a say?
Because, if everything goes well, they won't even notice? 

hth,
Patrick
-- 
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Thierry Carrez]

Paul Waring wrote:
> On 6/8/05, Daniel Drake <dsd@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>>  Polls are open for the metastructure reform vote.  All Gentoo developers are
>>eligible to vote.
> 
> Any particular reason why Gentoo users are not allowed to have a say?

This is about how we organize the work between Gentoo developers, I
think it's quite normal that those who vote on it are those directly
affected by it.

That said, feel free to influence the developers vote by telling us what
you would have chosen...

-- 
Koon
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 600 bytes --]

Paul Waring wrote: [Wed Jun 08 2005, 10:22:12AM CDT]
> On 6/8/05, Daniel Drake <dsd@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >   Polls are open for the metastructure reform vote.  All Gentoo developers are
> > eligible to vote.
> 
> Any particular reason why Gentoo users are not allowed to have a say?

Feel free, that's why dsd posted a notice on -dev.  Reply here, or on
the forums, or wherever, and people will probably notice.  

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear	
Gentoo Developer
g2boojum@gentoo.org
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Jim Northrup]

might I suggest not kicking #gentoo-dev visitors who ask for voice to
speak to the devs without a 'rtfm & go get a gentoo job' smokescreen ?
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Luca Barbato]

Jim Northrup wrote:
> might I suggest not kicking #gentoo-dev visitors who ask for voice to
> speak to the devs without a 'rtfm & go get a gentoo job' smokescreen ?
Sorry? Usually if the request for voice is polite enough won't be a
problem. Voiced/avoiced people usually are known by developers for their
outside contribution.

Feel free to ask me for the voice next time, beware that you must have a
reason to get a voice.

lu
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Rob Holland]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 08:59:34AM -0700, Jim Northrup wrote:
> might I suggest not kicking #gentoo-dev visitors who ask for voice to
> speak to the devs without a 'rtfm & go get a gentoo job' smokescreen ?

Sorry, I've missed how that's relevant to Gentoo metastructure..?

-- 
rob holland - [ tigger@gentoo.org ] - Gentoo Audit Team
[ 5251 4FAC D684 8845 5604  E44F D65C 392F D91B 4729 ]
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Patrick Lauer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 836 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 08:59 -0700, Jim Northrup wrote:
> might I suggest not kicking #gentoo-dev visitors who ask for voice to
> speak to the devs without a 'rtfm & go get a gentoo job' smokescreen ?
I hope this was only a misunderstanding / miscommunication.
#g-dev is already quite crowded and not a support channel like #gentoo.
So voice is only given when you can convince a dev that you have a
serious problem that can't be fixed by some RTFM'ing or the other
support channels (#gentoo, #gentoo-bugs, ...)
If your problem is "easy", #gentoo or RTFM works much better.

btw, hijacking a thread is also not "nice". Please start a new thread
when you wish to discuss a different problem and don't hijack another
thread for that ...

hth,
Patrick (bonsaikitten)
-- 
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Aron Griffis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 379 bytes --]

Jim Northrup wrote:	[Wed Jun 08 2005, 11:59:34AM EDT]
> might I suggest not kicking #gentoo-dev visitors who ask for voice to
> speak to the devs without a 'rtfm & go get a gentoo job' smokescreen ?

Making vague statements like this doesn't help anything.  If you have
a complaint, make it specific, and provide evidence.

Regards,
Aron

--
Aron Griffis
Gentoo Linux Developer


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Jason Huebel]

Jim Northrup wrote:

>might I suggest not kicking #gentoo-dev visitors who ask for voice to
>speak to the devs without a 'rtfm & go get a gentoo job' smokescreen ?
>  
>
That's not a metastructure change, so it's OT for this thread. However, 
to help you understand the purpose of voicing someone in #gentoo-dev, 
questions that are of a technical nature that are already documented on 
the gentoo.org site shouldn't require a user to be voiced in the 
channel.  They are already covered in the docs (RTFM) for that very reason.

Don't think that my comments are meant to sound like I'm annoyed. That's 
not the case.  The documentation on the gentoo.org site is there as a 
service to the users and is meant to cut down on the noise level in 
#gentoo-dev.  Since the docs are there, we want users to read them.

As with many OSS projects, Gentoo has a "help yourself" mentality.  That 
is, if you aren't willing to do a little legwork to find the answers 
yourself then you are much less likely to be successful in your OSS 
endeavors. 

I hope this answers your question.  Thanks for using Gentoo! :-)

Jason Huebel
Gentoo Board of Trustees Member
Gentoo Developer Relations Lead
Gentoo Recruiter

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Jason Stubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 358 bytes --]

On Thursday 09 June 2005 00:00, Daniel Drake wrote:
> - Form a task force for additional study ("Task-Force")
>   -core mail (7 June 2005) from jstubbs, 42A4D555.7010009@gentoo.org
>   (will be available on gentoo-dev as a response to this message)

Not very patient, were we? ;)

http://dev.gentoo.org/~jstubbs/taskforce_proposal.txt

Regards,
Jason Stubbs

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Sebastian Bergmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 517 bytes --]

Daniel Drake wrote:
> We are using dev.gentoo.org to collect ballots this year.  The
> procedure is as follows:
>
>     $ votify --new metastructure2005

 Where do I get votify from?

   wopr-mobile ~ # votify
   zsh: command not found: votify
   wopr-mobile ~ # emerge -s votify
   Searching...
   [ Results for search key : votify ]
   [ Applications found : 0 ]

--
Sebastian Bergmann                      http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B 6867 C514 B85B 5D69

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 253 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Patrick Lauer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 352 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 18:12 +0200, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Daniel Drake wrote:
> > We are using dev.gentoo.org to collect ballots this year.  The
> > procedure is as follows:
> >
> >     $ votify --new metastructure2005
> 
>  Where do I get votify from?
ssh dev.gentoo.org

:-)

-- 
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Jan Brinkmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 599 bytes --]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 06:12:59PM +0200, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
>  Where do I get votify from?
> 
>    wopr-mobile ~ # votify
>    zsh: command not found: votify
>    wopr-mobile ~ # emerge -s votify
>    Searching...
>    [ Results for search key : votify ]
>    [ Applications found : 0 ]

It's actually installed on toucan. You have to ssh into
dev.gentoo.org to be able to vote.


-- 
Jan Brinkmann :	Gentoo Developer (Amd64, Java, PPC, Sound, Video)
Email:		luckyduck (at) gentoo.org
Web: 		http://the-luckyduck.de
GPG:		gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-key 0xE38C3BBF

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Sebastian Bergmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 318 bytes --]

Jan Brinkmann wrote:
> It's actually installed on toucan. You have to ssh into
> dev.gentoo.org to be able to vote.

 Ah, makes sense. Sorry for bothering,
Sebastian

--
Sebastian Bergmann                      http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B 6867 C514 B85B 5D69

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 253 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Michael Cummings]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 880 bytes --]

Log into dev and type it :P

On Wednesday 08 June 2005 12:12 pm, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Daniel Drake wrote:
> > We are using dev.gentoo.org to collect ballots this year.  The
> > procedure is as follows:
> >
> >     $ votify --new metastructure2005
>
>  Where do I get votify from?
>
>    wopr-mobile ~ # votify
>    zsh: command not found: votify
>    wopr-mobile ~ # emerge -s votify
>    Searching...
>    [ Results for search key : votify ]
>    [ Applications found : 0 ]
>
> --
> Sebastian Bergmann                      http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
> GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B 6867 C514 B85B 5D69

-- 

-----o()o---------------------------------------------
Michael Cummings   |    #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl
Gentoo Perl Dev    |    on irc.freenode.net 
-----o()o---------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Stephen Bennett]

On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 18:12:59 +0200
Sebastian Bergmann <sebastian@gentoo.org> wrote:

>  Where do I get votify from?
> 
>    wopr-mobile ~ # votify
>    zsh: command not found: votify
>    wopr-mobile ~ # emerge -s votify
>    Searching...
>    [ Results for search key : votify ]
>    [ Applications found : 0 ]
> 

spb@toucan spb $ which votify
/usr/local/bin/votify
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo metastructure reform poll is open

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 599 bytes --]

On Wednesday 08 June 2005 17:12, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Daniel Drake wrote:
> > We are using dev.gentoo.org to collect ballots this year.  The
> > procedure is as follows:
> >
> >     $ votify --new metastructure2005
>
>  Where do I get votify from?
>
>    wopr-mobile ~ # votify
>    zsh: command not found: votify
>    wopr-mobile ~ # emerge -s votify
>    Searching...
>    [ Results for search key : votify ]
>    [ Applications found : 0 ]
>
Log in to dev.gentoo.org - it should be on there.
-- 
Gentoo Linux Developer
Scientific Applications | AMD64 | KDE | net-proxy

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]