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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GG4vf-0003JP-7J for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 02:26:47 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k7O2PIC7010392; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 02:25:18 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k7O2N4p8005644 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 02:23:04 GMT Received: from Leo (woodpecker.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EC346464E for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 02:23:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Democracy: No silver bullet From: Daniel Ostrow To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <44ECF00D.7050107@gentoo.org> References: <44ECF00D.7050107@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: The Gentoo Foundation Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:19:40 -0700 Message-Id: <1156385980.6774.27.camel@Leo> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 474521cf-110c-47ed-9897-837a8051dc96 X-Archives-Hash: 681977da6ff675dc3182f5cf1ac0acad > If I could go back in time a couple of years and prevent this democracy > from ever happening, I would. If I could fix these problems myself, I > would. But it requires buy-in from the entire Gentoo community if we're > to do anything about it. First of suffice it to say that many a time in the past (and that is sad to say as I have only been a dev for just over two years) I have been privy to whispered murmurs that happen in back rooms behind closed doors. These whispers have always come about when one of the aforementioned log threads have come about and the penultimate conclusion of every one is that the problem that Gentoo presently faces is in fact too much freedom. Part of me wants to believe that you are right in that the only way to get back to a place where there is true vision and power behind the Gentoo name is to get community buy in and part of me wants to hunker down and accept the likely reality that the only way to get back to a point of health is to start laying the "smack down". Now I don't mean to say that there is any negative connotation to that process...just that those that are elected to be in charge are inherently trusted to do their best for the future of Gentoo and that implicit in that trust is an understanding that they may have to take dirty and potentially unpopular roads to maintain that health. Bitching and complaining be damned; part of what paralyzes us is an acquiescence to that vocal minority. None of us want to deal with hearing the outcry so no-one does what is needed. Basically I'm saying that while some level of acceptance has to come from the community as a whole and some level of it has to come from the top down whatever the outcome. The Council has to be willing to be the body whose job is to maintain the long lasting heath and happiness of the developer community, that community is what Gentoo is. In addition to the conclusion that too much freedom has entered the life-blood that drives Gentoo it is also often the case that from the stance of upper management there is not enough freedom given. Part of what paralyzes the Council and devrel and any other historical body that has tried to keep Gentoo healthy is that there is an understanding that they can only act as a whole...as individuals none of them have power as there is fear that a rouge person in a position to abuse their responsibility will do so. It is my contention that with a body of multiple individuals such as the Council that there would be the ability to recognize and mitigate the damage done by such a rogue. I'd posit that by voting someone onto the council you are saying that you trust them enough to carry this duty on their shoulders. The Council itself should not be just a technical body to validate the merits of GLERs and/or emerging projects, it (or some other yet to be established group) has to carry the solemn duty of carrying Gentoo into the future, nurturing it as only a parent could. I'd also wager that allowing those who have been trusted to be in power to act a little on their own would provide the capability for that group to react more quickly, there wouldn't need to be emergency meetings, you wouldn't need to push off decisions for a full month and in general as there would be more activity there would also be more transparency as the actions of the group would be visible. All in all I suppose that is the platform that I am running on for this years Council...take it for what you will but that is where I stand. Thanks, --Dan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list