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 1GGLET-00083Z-NB for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:51:18 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k7OJnlSU011271; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:49:47 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 k7OJk7SN031469 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:46:08 GMT Received: from edge.zivexott.local (unknown [63.205.234.222]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 575446480C for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:46:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Democracy: No silver bullet From: Daniel Ostrow To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <44EDF61C.40303@gentoo.org> References: <44ECF00D.7050107@gentoo.org> <44EDDE39.6030604@gentoo.org> <44EDE498.70909@gentoo.org> <200608242003.48043.jaervosz@gentoo.org> <44EDEC72.8030207@gentoo.org> <44EDF61C.40303@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-kWlM8eTurik3WldQfK81" Organization: The Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:45:33 -0700 Message-Id: <1156448733.7064.22.camel@edge> 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 X-Archives-Salt: aea44632-da0c-4b47-ae92-0e43bebe9dbb X-Archives-Hash: 96ca6e7cadfb47bc5c336d8b0603ebdd --=-kWlM8eTurik3WldQfK81 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2006-08-24 at 20:55 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Lance Albertson wrote: >=20 > > Anyways, I'm not going to take any more flame bait since I'm sick and > > tired of this shit. >=20 > And my intention was not to revive that precise debate. I'm just saying > that for the "leader" (or "strong council") to succeed, everyone has to > follow what he/they decide. >=20 > With the current organization/devsgroup, very often the affected team > will think that the decision is not right or could be improved (and very > often they will be right, as they know better their turf than anyone). > Is *everyone* here prepared to obey to orders they won't like ? >=20 > That's why I agree with you Lance when you say : >=20 > > I'm afraid those days are in the past unless some kind of fork happens > > where the folks who think we need a leader go their way and the folks > > who prefer the leader-by-committee approach go their way. We all hate > > forks, none of us have time for forks, but looking at the dividing line= , > > I don't see how we'll be able to compromise with out adding more > > policies and BS. >=20 > I've done my best the last two years trying to change the metastructure > into something more efficient. I guess I failed. A lot of current devs > did not enter Gentoo by signing a "I will obey to the leader" paper, so > they decided noone can rule (or change the system). I see only a fork to > solve the division between those wanting strong leadership/vision and > those wanting gentoo-dev votes for every decision (yes, someone asked > for that not that long ago). The way I look at it is having strong leadership does not mean abdicating your ability to provide quality input in the leadership process. The entire reason for the two aforementioned issues boiled down to a lack of communication. I believe that the job of a good leader is to seek out feedback from those that know better about an issue then they do. Being a good leader *means* understanding your strengths and weaknesses. Taking the email issue previously mentioned as an example. The council was under the impression that since the discussions happened out in the open that any issues anyone had would have been raised in that forum, infra was under the impression that if they were going to be asked to perform a new duty that their opinions would have been actively solicited (and I'm talking more then "Well the meeting agenda was posted and no one from infra showed up ... I guess infra doesn't care.", what I am talking about is "Well this involves infra in a key way, lets get Lance and Kurt in here to discuss this and if we can't find them lets postpone the discussion until we can."), neither happened and what we ended up with was an edict that made no sense. Clearly, although filling this role is less then glamorous, the roll of those in charge has to include actively tracking the involved parties down, quiet acquiescence and silent acceptance can't work when dealing with issues that involve the hard work of other people. When I talk about strong leaders who provide a forward looking vision I am not talking about people who do this in a vacuum, I am talking about people who coalesce the will of the group into a cohesive plan and provide way points along the way to ensure that progress is being made. I am talking about people who build their own vision on top of the ideas of the other groups that make up the community. Sure even in those cases there will be conflicting goals and differing opinions but those in charge should be able to hear those out and try to come to a rational compromise. From there the decision has to stand...I have a feeling that following a plan, even when it doesn't jive with your view, will be an easier pill to swallow if you are sure that your input and concerns were honestly heard and digested as part of the decision making process. I think of the community as a whole as a sort of advisory board to the Council...I dunno, I'm sure there will still be those that are so upset that their choice, opinion, or plan was not heeded 100% that they throw a fit and/or leave but maybe just maybe that is OK, maybe that is just a sign that was they want isn't what Gentoo is. We are trying to make Gentoo everything for everyone and failing...maybe we just need to accept that we are not and cannot be and that people moving on to find what really is what they want is healthy, not only for Gentoo but for Linux and OSS as whole. --Dan --=-kWlM8eTurik3WldQfK81 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBE7gHdsb0gXCN8LgURAh8WAJ9OIFP64ElPjsreVfTzyzR9W8vATACcDnIR ohvFzo8HWnDyELFpVpGdRkw= =RpmN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-kWlM8eTurik3WldQfK81-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list