From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22220 invoked by uid 1002); 15 Jul 2003 10:28:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 27315 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2003 10:28:43 -0000 From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 12:28:39 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <20030714214621.33b75fbd.zhen@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Boundary-02=_Xd9E//F7SLG8k88"; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200307151228.39745.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.4 required=5.0 X-Spam-Level: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo part II. X-Archives-Salt: 8c9a5246-931f-4b8d-8788-8384f3adff5f X-Archives-Hash: 231e4cd774879380e8ca3053f77ddc2a --Boundary-02=_Xd9E//F7SLG8k88 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: signed data Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 15 July 2003 09:01, Martin Gramatke wrote: > While Gentoo is actually blessed with highly respectable managers, I have > absolutely no idea what the future will be if some of them change their > life plans, e.g. get headhunted by MS ;-) > > So I would really appreciate a more democratic structure in Gentoos's > management and I think Debian is a nice antetype. > > Not necessarily the users have to participate in such a voting system and > you really don't have to vote about technical issues which should be > decided by managers within their area of accountability. But at least the > managers should elect their own circle, role by role and temporal limited. This is exactly what happens. These internal elections are closed to protec= t=20 the privacy of the people concidered, and to allow for open discussion. Be= =20 assured though that it's not just Daniel deciding everything. > Gentoo now has a good base to start such a restructuring. With respect to > the notable efforts of individually managers in the past, I fully > understand if they want to keep their good influence on Gentoo. > > But a democratic structure would give me a much better feeling concerning > the long term availability and stability of Gentoo. This would wipe off my > last doubt if Gentoo is my distribution for at least the next twenty year= s. > In general gentoo is very democratic. Most decisions are debated through fo= r=20 extensive times on -core and #gentoo-dev. What is lacking is the fact that= =20 too often there is no one to say, "ok, this is what we agreed upon. If ther= e=20 are no new objections, implementors go ahead".=20 Paul =2D-=20 Paul de Vrieze Researcher Mail: pauldv@cs.kun.nl Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net --Boundary-02=_Xd9E//F7SLG8k88 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/E9dXbKx5DBjWFdsRAmO6AKC/K1aKeoMZ2cZA0rmqlln8laIksACgg1jN TKFWGmhoPxkWqht9bw+byFc= =lfdK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_Xd9E//F7SLG8k88--