From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-40733-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>) id 1O0zmn-0001hd-Kq for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 11 Apr 2010 16:13:25 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8C528E070F; Sun, 11 Apr 2010 16:13:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from earth.farbfinsternis.net (earth.farbfinsternis.net [87.118.98.117]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC654E06B1 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 11 Apr 2010 16:12:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.23] (p4FD514D6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.213.20.214]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by earth.farbfinsternis.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 06AE47C003A for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 11 Apr 2010 18:12:13 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4BC1F505.1000209@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 18:12:53 +0200 From: Matti Bickel <mabi@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100317) Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy regarding the inactive members References: <201004111616.41414.hwoarang@gentoo.org> <4BC1D709.2020503@gentoo.org> <20100411151705.GB2298@Caemlyn.Fullrate> In-Reply-To: <20100411151705.GB2298@Caemlyn.Fullrate> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig1980B38543B5F9DFBC31003C" X-Archives-Salt: 00067ba0-ec3f-4554-a997-2e02dccffb65 X-Archives-Hash: 56873d5ac5c9a64d05859c018515c3e8 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig1980B38543B5F9DFBC31003C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Zeerak Mustafa Waseem wrote: > But isn't it the councils purpose to lead gentoo? It's my understanding that council gets elected to lead gentoo as a whole. But in the end the one doing the work gets to decide what's going on (as long as it's intra-project; the only thing i remember where council got to vote on a "project" outcome is PMS/EAPI) Don't get me wrong: several times i hoped for somebody with authority to magically end discussions on an issue, handing out the right direction and be done with it (you already mentioned python-3). But in a "consensus" community like gentoo we will instantly have discussions about "our" definition of "right direction". Only a select few still have that authority required to end a sub-thread with their "right direction". And this is mostly because they post hard facts you are buying because they've done so for years and otherwise kept their mouth shut. But i disgress.. > By leading they have to either delegate to someone to supervise > Gentoo projects or do it themselves. No. It just doesn't work that way. GLEP39 says projects may have a leader, who will hopefully be responsible to the projects members. That's the person you want to turn to. Older projects may still have a "operation" lead and a "strategic" lead. In that case, you want the "strategic" lead :) The whole wording and history of the GLEP gives projects most of the power. They can't be blocked by the community, they can conflict, they can go defunct at any time. All these are explicitly spelled out in the GLEP. > I do agree > that doing something yourself will always be the first step, but > there is no way every developer can keep track of everything that's > going on. They are not required to. I'm not required to know of the wiki project or the huge issue that python3 going stable seems to be. My responsibility as a dev is to keep up with things I work on, like EAPI changes. If I *want* others to notice, I'll contact council (if I need a decision) or PR (if I have an announcement). You are proposing a centralized solution. This hasn't worked since Daniel left and I personally think gentoo's too large to successfully try it again. > I utterly fail to see why there should be any rock throwing. Me too. But it happens. Despite a dozen folks calling for calm again and again. I don't want to offer explanations for it, this mail has gotten long enough as it is ;) --------------enig1980B38543B5F9DFBC31003C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkvB9QUACgkQfNMcoUhJ7GyNgwCfQuLPRoi7+WQOHiH0Qn14qyi0 p08AoIuRMM+vgAggzAYxWMicWG8pBp0Y =912X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig1980B38543B5F9DFBC31003C--