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 1GG90G-0006p6-GL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 06:47:48 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k7O6l1F6019734; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 06:47:01 GMT Received: from aaa.dk (blackhole.aaa.dk [212.130.128.53]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k7O6j6au020738 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 06:45:06 GMT Received: from dundershields (dundershields.dyn.ph.auh.dk [10.16.48.22]) by aaa.dk with ESMTP; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 08:45:01 +0200 From: Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Democracy: No silver bullet Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 08:47:08 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 References: <44ECF00D.7050107@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <44ECF00D.7050107@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo Linux Security Team 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200608240847.08668.jaervosz@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 66e09a72-0c06-47b4-ba9a-cf806eafe73e X-Archives-Hash: e72ef659e8ad09b30409ea942bea0622 On Thursday 24 August 2006 02:17, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > When I think about where Gentoo was when we turned into a democracy > years ago, and where Gentoo is now, I don't see much of a difference on > the large scale. We lack any global vision for where Gentoo is going, we > can't agree on who our audience is, and everyone's just working on > pretty much whatever they feel like. Some like it that way others don't I think that is normal when you have elections. If more developers will work for a global vision we will have one. > The vocal minority often gets its way, despite 99% of the other > developers being happy with any given situation. Yeah, that is a problem. Simple rules and stronger enforcement of those rules would be great. > All in all, the vocal minority has done a splendid job of becoming more > influential, crippling Gentoo's ability to do anything at all about its > members, their flames, their outstanding work at ruining people's fun > and enjoyment of Gentoo, and their waste of everyone else's time. Then vote for someone else. > Being able to work together long term is this project's greatest asset, > one far more important than any set of changes to the code, and turning > arguments about code into issues that affect our long-term ability to > work harmoniously together is just not worth the trade-off by any > conceivable stretch of the imagination. ... I agree. If we can't come up with many global technical objectives this could be a good candidate . > I'm not the only one to suggest that a democracy isn't the most > productive way to run Gentoo. When people wanted to change in how Gentoo > was run, democracy was the only option considered, rather than simply > changing the leaders. There's an ongoing assumption that if problems > exist, it must be somewhere in the structure rather than in the people. Democracy is not just democracy it can be run in many ways. > 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. I was only a dev for a few months with drobbins so I don't really have any personal experience from that part of the Gentoo history but I definately would not like to abandon the Foundation and work under some arbitrary chief. Going backwards is not the solution. -- Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen (Jaervosz) Gentoo Linux Security Team -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list