From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54)
id 1EtVR1-0002eV-Ns
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2006 19:33:36 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k02JVwgr025427;
Mon, 2 Jan 2006 19:31:58 GMT
Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.200])
by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k02JSKag017174
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 2 Jan 2006 19:28:21 GMT
Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id x3so2536873nzd
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 02 Jan 2006 11:28:20 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=beta; d=gmail.com;
h=received:subject:from:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer;
b=LacJ5PJBLt2fMSx017HZR6rbHt20ffR4SWKIv/YYBWKLphKRvCV1oHP76UPtlWxIMf2Ui0its9xexZkIXFXrN8RasVHxKbFoRPzh8fcpw/cZsONhFE/4yIk2ZXxTqhWQUq/KVWSPWqjx5Jr+vKY3VN2sZuzKXHi/OAcj0E1Hvb4=
Received: by 10.64.150.20 with SMTP id x20mr262049qbd;
Mon, 02 Jan 2006 11:28:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?176.16.10.30? ( [68.144.157.61])
by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id e13sm3697152qbe.2006.01.02.11.28.17;
Mon, 02 Jan 2006 11:28:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January
From: Lares Moreau <lares.moreau@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
In-Reply-To: <1136228634.23404.125.camel@localhost>
References: <200601011053.k01ArjOh019213@robin.gentoo.org>
<43B96D6D.8080107@gentoo.org> <1136226795.8779.10.camel@localhost>
<43B975FD.1000401@gentoo.org> <1136228634.23404.125.camel@localhost>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-eO6nYeF9RWA1nw/3WmWW"
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:28:15 -0700
Message-Id: <1136230095.8779.32.camel@localhost>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1
X-Archives-Salt: 82e94e6f-fc6c-457b-a7db-8f7ae115a708
X-Archives-Hash: 8057626dd8189a22627f6c7bf0f54030
--=-eO6nYeF9RWA1nw/3WmWW
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 20:03 +0100, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 12:50 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
> > A mission statement only goes so far. The underlying leadership has to
> > make sure that statement is upheld and kept alive. Too many folks have =
a
> > mission statement, but no one ever remembers what it is or abides by it=
.
> I guess there isn't one driving force behind Gentoo - we have many=20
> differing opinions on things like QA, handling of bugs, ...
>=20
> It's just that usually Gentoo gets the least in your way when you're
> trying=20
> to do something :-)
>=20
> > I guess I'm almost hinting at that Gentoo needs a single entity that's
> > sole purpose is to drive/research the direction and goals for Gentoo.
> There was this Robbins guy ... remember him? ;-)
> > It'd be almost ceo-like, but the council is still top dawg. Right now, =
I
> > view our group as a bunch of chiefs with no real single leader saying
> > "lets strive to do this". The main problem is, too many people fear
> > about such a person could turn into a dictator, so I'm not sure if this
> > could ever happen.=20
> I wonder if any single person would be accepted?
> After all there is noone capable of forcing anyone to do anything as far
> as I can tell - worst case you fork Gentoo (again) and don't resolve
> the issues.
> > This person would be in constant contact of all the
> > groups and try to muck together what everyone is doing. They could
> > suggest things to help minimize user impact, maybe try to join two
> > projects if they are both working on a similar goal, thus minimizing th=
e
> > workload. Stuff like that essentially.
> Communication ... should happen anyway, but it seems to get more and
> more=20
> difficult. Another layer of bureaucracy won't help that ...
> > We need a good visionary. If such
> > a position were created, I also think that person's sole focus should b=
e
> > that focus within Gentoo. (i.e. they aren't a major contributor for a
> > subproject in Gentoo). This position would take too much time for them
> > to keep those other duties.
> ... and you'd burn out a capable person within half a year I think
> > Dunno, maybe I'm the loner here thinking this...
> Maybe a bit idealistic, but I mostly agree :-)
Upon doing some reading about what _exactly_ Gentoo council does, it
seems to me that Gentoo Council is an operations board. I think what
Patrick and Lance are getting at (correct me if I'm wrong) is that we
need to have some form of Governance board. A board that doesn't worry
about implementation details; a board that gives a long term vision to
our project.
I am a big believer is having a common goal to unite all people who work
with an organization. I'm sorry If I am repeating myself, but I feel
this is an issue that is vital to the continued success of Gentoo.
-Lares
--=20
Lares Moreau <lares.moreau@gmail.com> | LRU: 400755 http://counter.li.org
lares/irc.freenode.net |
Gentoo x86 Arch Tester | ::0 Alberta, Canada
Public Key: 0D46BB6E @ subkeys.pgp.net | Encrypted Mail Preferred
Key fingerprint =3D 0CA3 E40D F897 7709 3628 C5D4 7D94 483E 0D46 BB6E
--=-eO6nYeF9RWA1nw/3WmWW
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQBDuX7PfZRIPg1Gu24RApCpAJ9GShGTOZkgvnXFp6SLtHt7MOWKzgCgksuP
zE1W8FeiERv/Y7fRIZ6Wyf4=
=fuv5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-eO6nYeF9RWA1nw/3WmWW--
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list