[gentoo-project] A plan for Gentoo

[gentoo-project] A plan for Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6611 bytes --]

I have had various ideas for Gentoo spanning back to my time as a
Trustee. I was working hard them to make them happen and was making
great progress in short time. Sadly people got in the way. I have ZERO
interest in partaking in this directly myself. I maybe a lowly grunt.

These are my ideas alone. I have not discussed them with anyone other
than briefly in IRC #gentoo-java. No one helped me come up with this.
I have no agenda, or role for myself. None of this involves me.  I am
just going to toss this idea and run. No further comments from me.

In my opinion what needs to happen for Gentoo is it needs proper
organization and long term leadership, period.

Thus I propose the following.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Bring back Daniel Robbins he becomes Benevolent Dictator For Life,
  which he gave up when creating the foundation long ago. A new
  position part of the new structure. I have spoken with Daniel briefly
  publicly in #gentoo-java a few days ago. He is on board, no longer
  bitter and free of other duties.

- Council remains as is, and works with Daniel directly, each being
  basically equal. Nothing changes with council, election, etc. Just
  slight change in role. Permanent member in a sense, Daniel. But he
  cannot vote with council. Just shares in technical guidance,
  attends meetings, etc.

- Foundation remains as is and also works with Daniel. Daniel serves as
  like President of the foundation, with other officer positions being
  filled per Daniel and Trustees appointment. Foundation spends money on
  officer operations and other things to further Gentoo development and
  community.

- Trustees remain as advisers and stewards but are not responsible for
  day to day. They are to guide and provide wisdom etc. One new Trustee
  will be added for a life long term, as long as they see fit. Seemant
  Kulleen. He played an integral role in the early years of Gentoo. He
  has no idea I am proposing this, so I am throwing him under the bus.

- Being 3 parts any two can overrule the 3rd. All work together with
  Daniel serving as the head of both. With all three being directly
  connected with Daniel facilitating such. No 2 cannot remove
  Daniel, just overrule. If always overruled obviously would resign but
  that is not the idea.

- Funtoo becomes the Fedora of Gentoo. Experimental test ground where
  radical new ideas are tested and then moved over to Gentoo. All
  Gentoo devs immediate become Funtoo devs as well. Though not required
  to do anything. No bothering with opt out etc. Just connecting the
  two organizations and communities. Unite vs divide!!!!
  (This may even go so far as to say Funtoo is unstable and Gentoo
  become stable dropping the entire stable/unstable Gentoo concept.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From there what is next is up the the Daniel, the Foundation, and
Council. There is no further plan there. I have ideas but that is not
for me to say. It is for the new structure to decide its own future.

This will involve paid positions. Daniel will draw a salary, a
reasonable amount to be agreed upon by Trustees and him. Before anyone
goes crazy. Keep in mind he spent his own money to create the
Foundation. Gentoo was his and he handed it over. I doubt most anyone
would do the same. Most here will hardly give up their own roles...
Gentoo's attorney for various things is Daniels attorney. He lives near
the guy. Gentoo is still registered in New Mexico where only Daniel
lives no other devs, etc.

Also in most any country there were fore fathers/mothers. People who
came before you are respected, have statues, etc. Like Daniel or not,
he started Gentoo. He then handed it over and later started Funtoo. How
many major distros have you started? Keep that in mind and show him
some respect on that level if no others. Give him the benefit of the
doubt, good intentions for all vs self motivated he benefits alone,
everyone else loses out.

Ideally this leads to things like bring back Gentoo Weekly News Letter,
maybe with a bounty for articles so that is always well fed. Not to
mention pay for editors. Grants for developer equipment, travel, etc.
Working with vendors to get Gentoo certified on hardware and/or
hardware to use for development etc. Things that need a legal
representative and organization head. Just some ideas but there could
be others. These may never happen, and others may who knows. Not for me
to decide or say. Just some ideas.

These are random thoughts of the good stuff. Of course lots of bad
could happen. Though I really do not see how it can be any worse than
the past almost decade now. Gentoo cannot survive another decade like
the past. Hopefully wrong either way there. If Gentoo even remains in
the US. Almost want to bet others seek to move it outside.

Anyway that's my idea and plan. Do with it what you will. Having been
involved and around I see good things really. If others will have an
open mind and let others who care more about things you may now. Let
their ideas play out.

Daniel handed over Gentoo. He let the community play out their ideas.
Why not be fair and let him have a turn again? I think things were
going better back then...

P.S.
I barely know Daniel. We have never met or spoke directly on phone etc.
We have had various interactions over the years. Starting with me doing
research as a Trustee. Which developed to a mutual professional
respect. I have not really ever worked with him much. We do not know
each other well.

I know even less about Seemant and few if any interactions much less
publicly. These are not my buddies who will do anything for me if they
return. These are just the right guys in my opinion.

I myself as things have been and how I am seen and treated have no
interest in returning. I may serve as a lowly grunt cranking out
ebuilds and eclasses. Maybe lead Java direction but doubt I want to be
team lead or a developer. I am a bit bitter from the last decade of
mistreatment, public defamation, and being prevented from doing work.
To limit the massive backlog which now is out of control with Java 9.

Just disclosing I have no agenda once again. Nothing to do with me.
Just an idea to save Gentoo and course correction. Every ship needs a
captain. Two drivers never works :)

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3546 bytes --]

On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 19:20:21 -0500
"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:

> I have had various ideas for Gentoo spanning back to my time as a
> Trustee. I was working hard them to make them happen and was making
> great progress in short time. Sadly people got in the way. I have ZERO
> interest in partaking in this directly myself. I maybe a lowly grunt.
> 
> These are my ideas alone. I have not discussed them with anyone other
> than briefly in IRC #gentoo-java. No one helped me come up with this.
> I have no agenda, or role for myself. None of this involves me.  I am
> just going to toss this idea and run. No further comments from me.
> 
> In my opinion what needs to happen for Gentoo is it needs proper
> organization and long term leadership, period.
> 
> Thus I propose the following.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> - Bring back Daniel Robbins he becomes Benevolent Dictator For Life,
>   which he gave up when creating the foundation long ago. A new
>   position part of the new structure. I have spoken with Daniel
> briefly publicly in #gentoo-java a few days ago. He is on board, no
> longer bitter and free of other duties.
> 
> - Council remains as is, and works with Daniel directly, each being
>   basically equal. Nothing changes with council, election, etc. Just
>   slight change in role. Permanent member in a sense, Daniel. But he
>   cannot vote with council. Just shares in technical guidance,
>   attends meetings, etc.
> 
> - Foundation remains as is and also works with Daniel. Daniel serves
> as like President of the foundation, with other officer positions
> being filled per Daniel and Trustees appointment. Foundation spends
> money on officer operations and other things to further Gentoo
> development and community.
> 
> - Trustees remain as advisers and stewards but are not responsible for
>   day to day. They are to guide and provide wisdom etc. One new
> Trustee will be added for a life long term, as long as they see fit.
> Seemant Kulleen. He played an integral role in the early years of
> Gentoo. He has no idea I am proposing this, so I am throwing him
> under the bus.
> 
> - Being 3 parts any two can overrule the 3rd. All work together with
>   Daniel serving as the head of both. With all three being directly
>   connected with Daniel facilitating such. No 2 cannot remove
>   Daniel, just overrule. If always overruled obviously would resign
> but that is not the idea.
> 
> - Funtoo becomes the Fedora of Gentoo. Experimental test ground where
>   radical new ideas are tested and then moved over to Gentoo. All
>   Gentoo devs immediate become Funtoo devs as well. Though not
> required to do anything. No bothering with opt out etc. Just
> connecting the two organizations and communities. Unite vs divide!!!!
>   (This may even go so far as to say Funtoo is unstable and Gentoo
>   become stable dropping the entire stable/unstable Gentoo concept.)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, also relating to Funtoo. New Developers and/or contributors
maybe could start out as Funtoo devs and graduate to Gentoo. That may
also help with making them of "Gentoo" quality while not discarding
willing hands that may lack experience and/or skills. Funtoo becomes
Gentoo's grooming grounds for people and technology.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8813 bytes --]

OK, subscribed to this list so I can reply :)

There are some things I agree with to some extent in William's post and
some I do not.

First, Seemant is a fantastic guy and Gentoo would benefit greatly from his
return. He was an incredible asset on the project.

I am happy to get more involved with Gentoo. I've actually been working
with several Gentoo devs on several development-related things and plan to
continue to do so informally.

I am NOT interested in merging the Funtoo and Gentoo projects, nor in
making Funtoo a beta version of Gentoo. Not good for Funtoo, nor Gentoo.
But again, I am happy to get more involved with Gentoo. Let
cross-pollination happen when it makes sense.

I do see some positive things happening with Gentoo -- one is the wiki,
which is really nice. So I don't necessarily agree with the doom and gloom
camp, although I know that there is quite a bit of chronic frustration with
the direction of the project or lack of it, and certainly I have shared
that opinion in the past.

I do think Gentoo could benefit from some positive energy and some
additional support for development. I would like to assist with this
effort.

I think we do need to reach out to Google, who seems to have a habit of
poaching our developers, and work out some kind of arrangement of
cooperation. The sum total of stuff I've received from Google has been a
prototype Chromebook, a $50 prepaid VISA card, and a google blanket. No, I
am not making this up. I know these items were sent to me with the
intention of saying thanks, and meant as the kindest of gestures -- but
certainly, there are better ways for us to support one another?

Google has received some nice technology from Gentoo. The google blanket is
nice and fluffy, but I would like to see Gentoo have a bit more ability to
positively engage with Google and other organizations -- this was the
vision of the original not-for-profit that I created -- building the future
with partners who value free software.

Best Regards,

Daniel

On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 5:20 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com>
wrote:

> I have had various ideas for Gentoo spanning back to my time as a
> Trustee. I was working hard them to make them happen and was making
> great progress in short time. Sadly people got in the way. I have ZERO
> interest in partaking in this directly myself. I maybe a lowly grunt.
>
> These are my ideas alone. I have not discussed them with anyone other
> than briefly in IRC #gentoo-java. No one helped me come up with this.
> I have no agenda, or role for myself. None of this involves me.  I am
> just going to toss this idea and run. No further comments from me.
>
> In my opinion what needs to happen for Gentoo is it needs proper
> organization and long term leadership, period.
>
> Thus I propose the following.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------
> - Bring back Daniel Robbins he becomes Benevolent Dictator For Life,
>   which he gave up when creating the foundation long ago. A new
>   position part of the new structure. I have spoken with Daniel briefly
>   publicly in #gentoo-java a few days ago. He is on board, no longer
>   bitter and free of other duties.
>
> - Council remains as is, and works with Daniel directly, each being
>   basically equal. Nothing changes with council, election, etc. Just
>   slight change in role. Permanent member in a sense, Daniel. But he
>   cannot vote with council. Just shares in technical guidance,
>   attends meetings, etc.
>
> - Foundation remains as is and also works with Daniel. Daniel serves as
>   like President of the foundation, with other officer positions being
>   filled per Daniel and Trustees appointment. Foundation spends money on
>   officer operations and other things to further Gentoo development and
>   community.
>
> - Trustees remain as advisers and stewards but are not responsible for
>   day to day. They are to guide and provide wisdom etc. One new Trustee
>   will be added for a life long term, as long as they see fit. Seemant
>   Kulleen. He played an integral role in the early years of Gentoo. He
>   has no idea I am proposing this, so I am throwing him under the bus.
>
> - Being 3 parts any two can overrule the 3rd. All work together with
>   Daniel serving as the head of both. With all three being directly
>   connected with Daniel facilitating such. No 2 cannot remove
>   Daniel, just overrule. If always overruled obviously would resign but
>   that is not the idea.
>
> - Funtoo becomes the Fedora of Gentoo. Experimental test ground where
>   radical new ideas are tested and then moved over to Gentoo. All
>   Gentoo devs immediate become Funtoo devs as well. Though not required
>   to do anything. No bothering with opt out etc. Just connecting the
>   two organizations and communities. Unite vs divide!!!!
>   (This may even go so far as to say Funtoo is unstable and Gentoo
>   become stable dropping the entire stable/unstable Gentoo concept.)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> From there what is next is up the the Daniel, the Foundation, and
> Council. There is no further plan there. I have ideas but that is not
> for me to say. It is for the new structure to decide its own future.
>
> This will involve paid positions. Daniel will draw a salary, a
> reasonable amount to be agreed upon by Trustees and him. Before anyone
> goes crazy. Keep in mind he spent his own money to create the
> Foundation. Gentoo was his and he handed it over. I doubt most anyone
> would do the same. Most here will hardly give up their own roles...
> Gentoo's attorney for various things is Daniels attorney. He lives near
> the guy. Gentoo is still registered in New Mexico where only Daniel
> lives no other devs, etc.
>
> Also in most any country there were fore fathers/mothers. People who
> came before you are respected, have statues, etc. Like Daniel or not,
> he started Gentoo. He then handed it over and later started Funtoo. How
> many major distros have you started? Keep that in mind and show him
> some respect on that level if no others. Give him the benefit of the
> doubt, good intentions for all vs self motivated he benefits alone,
> everyone else loses out.
>
> Ideally this leads to things like bring back Gentoo Weekly News Letter,
> maybe with a bounty for articles so that is always well fed. Not to
> mention pay for editors. Grants for developer equipment, travel, etc.
> Working with vendors to get Gentoo certified on hardware and/or
> hardware to use for development etc. Things that need a legal
> representative and organization head. Just some ideas but there could
> be others. These may never happen, and others may who knows. Not for me
> to decide or say. Just some ideas.
>
> These are random thoughts of the good stuff. Of course lots of bad
> could happen. Though I really do not see how it can be any worse than
> the past almost decade now. Gentoo cannot survive another decade like
> the past. Hopefully wrong either way there. If Gentoo even remains in
> the US. Almost want to bet others seek to move it outside.
>
> Anyway that's my idea and plan. Do with it what you will. Having been
> involved and around I see good things really. If others will have an
> open mind and let others who care more about things you may now. Let
> their ideas play out.
>
> Daniel handed over Gentoo. He let the community play out their ideas.
> Why not be fair and let him have a turn again? I think things were
> going better back then...
>
> P.S.
> I barely know Daniel. We have never met or spoke directly on phone etc.
> We have had various interactions over the years. Starting with me doing
> research as a Trustee. Which developed to a mutual professional
> respect. I have not really ever worked with him much. We do not know
> each other well.
>
> I know even less about Seemant and few if any interactions much less
> publicly. These are not my buddies who will do anything for me if they
> return. These are just the right guys in my opinion.
>
> I myself as things have been and how I am seen and treated have no
> interest in returning. I may serve as a lowly grunt cranking out
> ebuilds and eclasses. Maybe lead Java direction but doubt I want to be
> team lead or a developer. I am a bit bitter from the last decade of
> mistreatment, public defamation, and being prevented from doing work.
> To limit the massive backlog which now is out of control with Java 9.
>
> Just disclosing I have no agenda once again. Nothing to do with me.
> Just an idea to save Gentoo and course correction. Every ship needs a
> captain. Two drivers never works :)
>
> --
> William L. Thomson Jr.
>
> --
> William L. Thomson Jr.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 9876 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Andreas K. Huettel]

Hi Daniel, 

> First, Seemant is a fantastic guy and Gentoo would benefit greatly from his
> return. He was an incredible asset on the project.

Sure, sounds like a good idea, if he wants to.

> I am happy to get more involved with Gentoo. I've actually been working
> with several Gentoo devs on several development-related things and plan to
> continue to do so informally.

Sounds also like a good idea. Feel free to get in touch with the recruiters.

> I do think Gentoo could benefit from some positive energy and some
> additional support for development. I would like to assist with this
> effort.

A significant part of the "negative energy" comes from a generation conflict.

Strongly simplifying, we had "oldtimers" who were used to organically grown 
rules (see games team, which by force of tradition ignored QA and council), 
and we had the "new" developers like me, who were recruited over the years 
according to developed procedures and were told to stick to rules. That led to 
effectively two classes of developers, with more and more increasing clashes. 
Devrel, mostly consisting of people who were around a long time, was not 
helpful. What happened eventually that the oldtimers were so much in the 
minority that they got overruled more and more. See games team, which was 
dissolved by the council, and see toolchain, which was basically completely 
abandoned for a year before re-forming with new people.

We are finally reaching the point where "new" people have a significant say in 
Gentoo, and where rules apply the same to every dev and there are not a 
selected few exempt. Which has already improved the overall mood a lot.

How do you want to contribute to this improvement?

> I think we do need to reach out to Google, who seems to have a habit of
> poaching our developers, and work out some kind of arrangement of
> cooperation. The sum total of stuff I've received from Google has been a
> prototype Chromebook, a $50 prepaid VISA card, and a google blanket. No, I
> am not making this up. I know these items were sent to me with the
> intention of saying thanks, and meant as the kindest of gestures -- but
> certainly, there are better ways for us to support one another?

I'm seeing this critical. OK I'm probably one of the few persons here who is 
not hoping to get recruited by Google at some point. However...

One of the side effects of Google poaching our developers was that we ended up 
with some mystery changes in core Gentoo stuff that noone ever explained, and 
that possibly were added to support ChromeOS. Now, there's nothing wrong with 
being cooperative. What is wrong is smuggling stuff in under the radar. 
Disclaimer, I can't prove any of this, but a few times I had a rather odd 
feeling.

And please don't listen too much to wltjr. Most of us stop reading a mailing 
list thread as soon as he is involved.

Cheers, 
Andreas


-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer 
(council, toolchain, perl, libreoffice, comrel)

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Roy Bamford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1242 bytes --]

On 2017.12.06 09:09, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
[snip]
> We are finally reaching the point where "new" people have a
> significant say in 
> Gentoo, and where rules apply the same to every dev and there are not
> a 
> selected few exempt. Which has already improved the overall mood a
> lot.
> 
> How do you want to contribute to this improvement?
> 
[snip]

> Cheers, 
> Andreas
> 
> 
> -- 
> Andreas K. Hüttel
> dilfridge@gentoo.org
> Gentoo Linux developer 
> (council, toolchain, perl, libreoffice, comrel)
> 
> 

Team,

As possibly one of the 'old timers' the key words I'm quoting are
"contribute to this improvement?"

There is no going back.  We are where we are now. We need to 
get to where we want to be.  That may or may not involve
previous contributors but if it does, it needs be under the current
rules until the rules are changed.

One thing that is not possible in any volunteer organistion is to
make massive overnight changes. The body of volunteers need
to be convinced first and that takes time.  A long sequence of 
small changes are far more likely to be accepted. That takes 
time. 

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8266 bytes --]

HI Andreas,

I am guessing the 'oldtimers' where the ones who sort of took control after
I left, in which case, I agree -- Gentoo absolutely needs to be egalitarian
in its approach and consistent in its policies. While the one-BDFL model
*might* be a project structure that can work (it works for Funtoo, but
likely not Gentoo -- certainly not now) -- when you have a horde of "little
BDFLs", they are their own little ruling clique that answers to no one, and
you effectively don't have a functioning internal structure -- just a
divide -- and the resulting angst. It sucks. And I understand how wltjr
mentioning Seemant brings visions of the "old days" (really, Seemant and I
were the 'original dudes' and not the 'oldtimers' you speak of) and that
can get people feeling sketchy about going back to the 'dark ages' or
trying to impose me as BDFL on the project (I know that wltjr has fantasies
of this, and it's something I don't want. But me being more involved with
Gentoo... that's something that is positive and we can discuss.)

As for my involvement, here is what I think makes sense. As Roy points out,
Gentoo is where it is, with the rules it has. These rules must be accepted
and respected. We must build on what currently exists, to respect those who
have invested in and lived within the metastructure. I have sensed a great
deal of goodwill from numerous people on the Gentoo side related to
positive and friendly collaboration. I want to build on that.

I am making myself available to assist in some way. What I think makes
sense is the following (view this as a proposal, expressed in list form...)

  1. The council invites me to participate in all council discussions and
meetings, and effectively treats me as a non-voting member. I'd propose a
council vote to give me a permanent status of a non-voting member, maybe
with some exception that I can be kicked out for a year at a time if a
majority of the council can demonstrate and vote that I am regularly being
disruptive or some such thing. This provides an open invitation from the
council for my positive contribution to the project. We can then
legitimately say that 'Daniel is back and helping out Gentoo!' --
satisfying those who want that (both the BDFL fantasizers and those who are
legitimately just happy that I'm back helping) and gives me the regular
exposure to various issues so I can get familiar with where I can help out
the project most effectively. I am not a magical solution to problems -- I
am making myself available to try to understand and help, and get involved
as it makes sense, and this requires regular exposure to the current
challenges and opportunities. This would make that possible.

  2. I look at running for a seat on the council in the coming elections.
If I run and am elected, I would then of course be a voting member of the
council. The experience gained from item #1 would provide me with enough of
a clue so if I were elected (I figure I have a good shot), I would be
familiar with the existing processes of the council and the current
challenges and thus would be able to be a positive voting contributor to
the council rather than a distraction. Thus, if this were to happen, there
will be much less uncertainty and drama and much more continuity.

  3. I will continue to work with members of the Gentoo dev team on various
development-related projects. If, for running for council, I am required to
be a Gentoo developer, I can go through the recruitment process. However, I
am frankly happy working with Gentoo developers as I am doing now and I
feel like it is less likely to cause problems if I do NOT have direct
commit access to Gentoo repos. So maybe the council could vote an exception
to my need to have access to the Gentoo repos. I think this would make it
easier for everyone -- people would not need to worry that I would subvert
existing processes. And I see no reason why I need direct commit access.
(Side-note: Maybe this is a model for the future -- have the most senior
old-timers 'graduate' to non-direct-commit roles so they cannot subvert the
process and thus are forced to work with existing teams. In effect, a kind
of 'term limit' -- force them spread their wings and use GitHub like
everyone else as they already have enough clout to get people to look at
their code.)

I think the process above would make my re-involvement with the project as
uneventful as possible, and most likely to be perceived as positive by all
stake-holders. (Council, devs, users, BDFL worshippers, etc.) Approached
this way, there isn't any real ambiguity or drama about what my role is and
how that relates to the roles of others, and I am letting people know ahead
of time about my intention to run for council. Then hopefully we can focus
on bigger issues like actually making Gentoo better and more fun :)

Let me know what you think.

Best Regards,

Daniel

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:09 AM, Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@gentoo.org>
wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> > First, Seemant is a fantastic guy and Gentoo would benefit greatly from
> his
> > return. He was an incredible asset on the project.
>
> Sure, sounds like a good idea, if he wants to.
>
> > I am happy to get more involved with Gentoo. I've actually been working
> > with several Gentoo devs on several development-related things and plan
> to
> > continue to do so informally.
>
> Sounds also like a good idea. Feel free to get in touch with the
> recruiters.
>
> > I do think Gentoo could benefit from some positive energy and some
> > additional support for development. I would like to assist with this
> > effort.
>
> A significant part of the "negative energy" comes from a generation
> conflict.
>
> Strongly simplifying, we had "oldtimers" who were used to organically grown
> rules (see games team, which by force of tradition ignored QA and council),
> and we had the "new" developers like me, who were recruited over the years
> according to developed procedures and were told to stick to rules. That
> led to
> effectively two classes of developers, with more and more increasing
> clashes.
> Devrel, mostly consisting of people who were around a long time, was not
> helpful. What happened eventually that the oldtimers were so much in the
> minority that they got overruled more and more. See games team, which was
> dissolved by the council, and see toolchain, which was basically completely
> abandoned for a year before re-forming with new people.
>
> We are finally reaching the point where "new" people have a significant
> say in
> Gentoo, and where rules apply the same to every dev and there are not a
> selected few exempt. Which has already improved the overall mood a lot.
>
> How do you want to contribute to this improvement?
>
> > I think we do need to reach out to Google, who seems to have a habit of
> > poaching our developers, and work out some kind of arrangement of
> > cooperation. The sum total of stuff I've received from Google has been a
> > prototype Chromebook, a $50 prepaid VISA card, and a google blanket. No,
> I
> > am not making this up. I know these items were sent to me with the
> > intention of saying thanks, and meant as the kindest of gestures -- but
> > certainly, there are better ways for us to support one another?
>
> I'm seeing this critical. OK I'm probably one of the few persons here who
> is
> not hoping to get recruited by Google at some point. However...
>
> One of the side effects of Google poaching our developers was that we
> ended up
> with some mystery changes in core Gentoo stuff that noone ever explained,
> and
> that possibly were added to support ChromeOS. Now, there's nothing wrong
> with
> being cooperative. What is wrong is smuggling stuff in under the radar.
> Disclaimer, I can't prove any of this, but a few times I had a rather odd
> feeling.
>
> And please don't listen too much to wltjr. Most of us stop reading a
> mailing
> list thread as soon as he is involved.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>
>
> --
> Andreas K. Hüttel
> dilfridge@gentoo.org
> Gentoo Linux developer
> (council, toolchain, perl, libreoffice, comrel)
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 9234 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Christopher Díaz Riveros]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1616 bytes --]

Hi Daniel,

El mié, 06-12-2017 a las 09:53 -0700, Daniel Robbins escribió:
>   3. I will continue to work with members of the Gentoo dev team on
> various development-related projects. If, for running for council, I
> am required to be a Gentoo developer, I can go through the
> recruitment process. However, I am frankly happy working with Gentoo
> developers as I am doing now and I feel like it is less likely to
> cause problems if I do NOT have direct commit access to Gentoo repos.
> So maybe the council could vote an exception to my need to have
> access to the Gentoo repos. I think this would make it easier for
> everyone -- people would not need to worry that I would subvert
> existing processes. And I see no reason why I need direct commit
> access. 
> 

Just to mention that if that's the case you can always take the non-
commit developer quiz [1]. That way you'll meet all the requirements in
the election rules. And it's a good way to refresh all the basic
knowledge about the procedures and structure.

> intention to run for council. Then hopefully we can focus on bigger
> issues like actually making Gentoo better and more fun :)
> 
> Let me know what you think.
> 

Personally I like the idea of Gentoo and Funtoo having more
collaboration among each other, and I think that the primary goal is
and always will be to make Gentoo better. 


[1]: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Recruiters/Quiz#Quiz_selectio
n_2

Best regards,
-- 
Christopher Díaz Riveros
Gentoo Linux Developer
GPG Fingerprint: E517 5ECB 8152 98E4 FEBC  2BAA 4DBB D10F 0FDD 2547

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 636 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Raymond Jennings]

Speaking as someone who has had a less than stellar ride on the
recruiting process, but who somehow managed to get foundation
membership due to non-code and non-ebuild related contributions, as
well as a patch in the linux kernel.

I LOVE gentoo, as a user.  I have been an avid gentoo user ever since
a friend of mine told me about.

The control over my machine, nothing hard coded, nothing getting in my
way when I need to tell my computer what to do and how to do it.  Of
course, it doesn't much save me when I shoot myself in the foot, but
honestly, I'd rather do that than have stuff hard-coded that I can't
change.

I love being able to set my machine up the way I need it, and it's
proving to, perhaps on topic further, serve as the foundation of a
growing file the recruiters at google are building on me as a
potential candidate.  Gentoo might actually help me get a job if it
continues to give me an education on software engineering and system
administration.  Would be a welcome upgrade to my life of being a
disabled "basement dweller"

And Gentoo actually inspired me in a way to get my computer and
networking gear hooked up to a UPS device...which actually saved my
family from some otherwise intense grief during a power failure when I
was able to use my UPS powered internet connection to look up the
power company's phone number.

Using x11vnc (encrypted, and through a SSH tunnel) also gave me some
hands on practice at remote system administration, using my own gentoo
powered desktop as a guinea pig and my android phone from afar across
the cloud to get back into my machine...and then putting up a tunnel
after noticing some alien IPs were pinging my x11vnc server :P.

All in all, Gentoo has been an EXTREMELY positive influence in my
life, both personally, hobby wise, and hopefully a solid base going
forward if/when my career gets started as a software engineer.

So whatever it takes to keep Gentoo being the most awesome linux
distro I have seen yet, has my approval.  I joined the foundation for
a reason.

Speaking of which, what would the trustees of the foundation say about
this conversation?  I'm assuming that they're designed to be more than
asset monkeys.

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Christopher Díaz Riveros
<chrisadr@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> El mié, 06-12-2017 a las 09:53 -0700, Daniel Robbins escribió:
>>   3. I will continue to work with members of the Gentoo dev team on
>> various development-related projects. If, for running for council, I
>> am required to be a Gentoo developer, I can go through the
>> recruitment process. However, I am frankly happy working with Gentoo
>> developers as I am doing now and I feel like it is less likely to
>> cause problems if I do NOT have direct commit access to Gentoo repos.
>> So maybe the council could vote an exception to my need to have
>> access to the Gentoo repos. I think this would make it easier for
>> everyone -- people would not need to worry that I would subvert
>> existing processes. And I see no reason why I need direct commit
>> access.
>>
>
> Just to mention that if that's the case you can always take the non-
> commit developer quiz [1]. That way you'll meet all the requirements in
> the election rules. And it's a good way to refresh all the basic
> knowledge about the procedures and structure.
>
>> intention to run for council. Then hopefully we can focus on bigger
>> issues like actually making Gentoo better and more fun :)
>>
>> Let me know what you think.
>>
>
> Personally I like the idea of Gentoo and Funtoo having more
> collaboration among each other, and I think that the primary goal is
> and always will be to make Gentoo better.
>
>
> [1]: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Recruiters/Quiz#Quiz_selectio
> n_2
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Christopher Díaz Riveros
> Gentoo Linux Developer
> GPG Fingerprint: E517 5ECB 8152 98E4 FEBC  2BAA 4DBB D10F 0FDD 2547

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Kristian Fiskerstrand]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 876 bytes --]

On 12/06/2017 06:53 PM, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> 1. The council invites me to participate in all council discussions
> and meetings, and effectively treats me as a non-voting member.

The council structure is part of GLEP:39 so can't really be changed on a
whim, that said I'm not sure what a non-voting member for council would
mean, given that, in particular, we've allowed input from others during
the council meetings to begin with, so no special status is required to
contribute.

> 2. I look at running for a seat on the council in the coming
> elections. If I run and am elected, I would then of course be a
> voting member of the council.

Naturally, I don't see any need for anything special before this.

-- 
Kristian Fiskerstrand
OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1300 bytes --]

Hi Daniel, 

I think it's a good thing that you intend to contribute to Gentoo directly 
again. After all, we are happy about all material contributions.

That said... 

I don't see the point of the "non-voting council member" special treatment at 
all; I draw a hard line there. Council meetings are public and usually 
unmoderated, and constructive comments are always welcome. No special rules 
needed (and also no special rules possible, but I don't intend to hide behind 
formalities).

My suggestion would be
* you contribute (which is fully enough to say "Daniel is back and helping out 
Gentoo!")
* you get to know people, and people get to know you
* and you (try to) get elected to the council like everybody else.

Let's be honest, I barely know you, and I've been around for about 7 years 
now. (That's much longer than you ever were Gentoo developer by the way...)

And we should also take into consideration that George Santayana quote, "Those 
Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It." I made it my task to read 
up old e-mail threads and logs, and you then stumble upon https://lwn.net/
Articles/224615/ ...

Cheers, 
Andreas

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer 
(council, toolchain, perl, libreoffice, comrel)

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6042 bytes --]

Hi Andreas,

Yes, you bring up an old argument I had with ciaranm (who I am sure no one
has ever got in an argument with before, wink wink.)

Looking at my past, I think you may find it a familiar trajectory that
resonates with a lot of senior Gentoo contributors: unbridled youthful
enthusiasm, which then turns into incredible productivity and growth, then
additional burdens, responsibilities and demands, resulting in eventual
burn-out and cynicism. I was the first astronaut to be launched into orbit,
so to speak, so I got to experience this fantastic voyage first -- but I am
sure you know others who have followed in my foot-steps in this area. So I
think the point you raise is actually important, but it should not be
presented as a personal attack on me, but as a general weakness in Gentoo
related to mentorship, growth and direction for senior-level Gentoo
contributors and providing them with positive (good for the project, good
for them) outlets for their immense talent, while preventing their
incredible influence gained within the project from turning into a negative
and causing internal strife.

Everyone needs a path of growth, including our most senior people. I can
tell you from personal experience that dealing with this by having an
internal civil war is not good for the project or for those personally
involved. It can be extremely damaging. I feel like I have felt the pain of
walking this path and am motivated to prevent other senior Gentoo
developers from eventually becoming cynical and burnt out. I have talked to
a couple recently who are clearly experiencing this. I frankly think this
is very important to address for the health of the project. In particular,
we have recently lost vapier and I am concerned about a few others. I think
that the solution to this is to have a vision of forward evolution and
growth of the project -- we need new, bigger challenges and our most senior
people need to 'graduate' into playing a leading role in shaping the future
of technology. We all need to support one another instead of fighting
amongst each other.

The phrase of 'non-voting council member' is essentially meaningless -- I
ask that I would be included in council meetings and allowed to speak
during them. I think this is a reasonable request considering my
background. My intention is to contribute. If I were to simply be invited
to these meetings, and sincerely allowed to participate and not experience
any passive-aggressive behavior from council members who may prefer to not
have me there, I think this would be sufficient. If it seemed presumptuous
to propose a vote or a special role, I understand, apologize, and I assure
you that it is motivated by enthusiasm and not expectation of special
treatment.

FWIW, I have applied to be a non-committing Gentoo developer. Zac Medio is
my mentor, so I will be completing that process. I have interest in being
involved in the following roles:

1) Council. I would be happy to participate in council meetings. Just know
that if I were invited to participate, I would.

2) Trustees. I notice that we only have four trustees. I would be happy to
serve as the 'fifth Beatle' which would legally obligate me in my role as
trustee to represent the interests of the Gentoo Foundation and the health
of the project, and coordinate with attorneys, etc.

3) Contributor. I will continue to work with Zac Medico on resolving
various obscure Portage bugs (often this is more of an IRC discussion and
exploration of possibilities to solve the problem, which results in some
kind of definitive plan to address a long-standing bug.) I am also planning
to work with robbat2 on a genkernel rewrite and am open to other areas of
collaboration, both personally and between Gentoo and Funtoo.

4) Metastructure. I would like to start thinking about how to build a
positive future for those very senior Gentoo developers who have
traditionally experienced burn-out and cynicism.

5) Fund-raising. I would ideally like to see the Gentoo Foundation have an
operating budget of around .5M USD. I think this is an achievable goal.
This means having a positive vision for Gentoo that we can communicate
outwards and that resonates with the world.

6) Collaboration. I have some interesting ideas for how we can build
win-win relationships with Google, Sony and other organizations that are
using Gentoo -- we can do more than we are doing now.

7) Developer. Ongoing work on Portage and genkernel, and other areas.

Regards,

Daniel



On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@gentoo.org>
wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> I think it's a good thing that you intend to contribute to Gentoo directly
> again. After all, we are happy about all material contributions.
>
> That said...
>
> I don't see the point of the "non-voting council member" special treatment
> at
> all; I draw a hard line there. Council meetings are public and usually
> unmoderated, and constructive comments are always welcome. No special rules
> needed (and also no special rules possible, but I don't intend to hide
> behind
> formalities).
>
> My suggestion would be
> * you contribute (which is fully enough to say "Daniel is back and helping
> out
> Gentoo!")
> * you get to know people, and people get to know you
> * and you (try to) get elected to the council like everybody else.
>
> Let's be honest, I barely know you, and I've been around for about 7 years
> now. (That's much longer than you ever were Gentoo developer by the way...)
>
> And we should also take into consideration that George Santayana quote,
> "Those
> Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It." I made it my task to
> read
> up old e-mail threads and logs, and you then stumble upon https://lwn.net/
> Articles/224615/ ...
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>
> --
> Andreas K. Hüttel
> dilfridge@gentoo.org
> Gentoo Linux developer
> (council, toolchain, perl, libreoffice, comrel)
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6922 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6405 bytes --]

typo: Medico, not Medio :)

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Daniel Robbins <drobbins@funtoo.org> wrote:

> Hi Andreas,
>
> Yes, you bring up an old argument I had with ciaranm (who I am sure no one
> has ever got in an argument with before, wink wink.)
>
> Looking at my past, I think you may find it a familiar trajectory that
> resonates with a lot of senior Gentoo contributors: unbridled youthful
> enthusiasm, which then turns into incredible productivity and growth, then
> additional burdens, responsibilities and demands, resulting in eventual
> burn-out and cynicism. I was the first astronaut to be launched into orbit,
> so to speak, so I got to experience this fantastic voyage first -- but I am
> sure you know others who have followed in my foot-steps in this area. So I
> think the point you raise is actually important, but it should not be
> presented as a personal attack on me, but as a general weakness in Gentoo
> related to mentorship, growth and direction for senior-level Gentoo
> contributors and providing them with positive (good for the project, good
> for them) outlets for their immense talent, while preventing their
> incredible influence gained within the project from turning into a negative
> and causing internal strife.
>
> Everyone needs a path of growth, including our most senior people. I can
> tell you from personal experience that dealing with this by having an
> internal civil war is not good for the project or for those personally
> involved. It can be extremely damaging. I feel like I have felt the pain of
> walking this path and am motivated to prevent other senior Gentoo
> developers from eventually becoming cynical and burnt out. I have talked to
> a couple recently who are clearly experiencing this. I frankly think this
> is very important to address for the health of the project. In particular,
> we have recently lost vapier and I am concerned about a few others. I think
> that the solution to this is to have a vision of forward evolution and
> growth of the project -- we need new, bigger challenges and our most senior
> people need to 'graduate' into playing a leading role in shaping the future
> of technology. We all need to support one another instead of fighting
> amongst each other.
>
> The phrase of 'non-voting council member' is essentially meaningless -- I
> ask that I would be included in council meetings and allowed to speak
> during them. I think this is a reasonable request considering my
> background. My intention is to contribute. If I were to simply be invited
> to these meetings, and sincerely allowed to participate and not experience
> any passive-aggressive behavior from council members who may prefer to not
> have me there, I think this would be sufficient. If it seemed presumptuous
> to propose a vote or a special role, I understand, apologize, and I assure
> you that it is motivated by enthusiasm and not expectation of special
> treatment.
>
> FWIW, I have applied to be a non-committing Gentoo developer. Zac Medio is
> my mentor, so I will be completing that process. I have interest in being
> involved in the following roles:
>
> 1) Council. I would be happy to participate in council meetings. Just know
> that if I were invited to participate, I would.
>
> 2) Trustees. I notice that we only have four trustees. I would be happy to
> serve as the 'fifth Beatle' which would legally obligate me in my role as
> trustee to represent the interests of the Gentoo Foundation and the health
> of the project, and coordinate with attorneys, etc.
>
> 3) Contributor. I will continue to work with Zac Medico on resolving
> various obscure Portage bugs (often this is more of an IRC discussion and
> exploration of possibilities to solve the problem, which results in some
> kind of definitive plan to address a long-standing bug.) I am also planning
> to work with robbat2 on a genkernel rewrite and am open to other areas of
> collaboration, both personally and between Gentoo and Funtoo.
>
> 4) Metastructure. I would like to start thinking about how to build a
> positive future for those very senior Gentoo developers who have
> traditionally experienced burn-out and cynicism.
>
> 5) Fund-raising. I would ideally like to see the Gentoo Foundation have an
> operating budget of around .5M USD. I think this is an achievable goal.
> This means having a positive vision for Gentoo that we can communicate
> outwards and that resonates with the world.
>
> 6) Collaboration. I have some interesting ideas for how we can build
> win-win relationships with Google, Sony and other organizations that are
> using Gentoo -- we can do more than we are doing now.
>
> 7) Developer. Ongoing work on Portage and genkernel, and other areas.
>
> Regards,
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> I think it's a good thing that you intend to contribute to Gentoo directly
>> again. After all, we are happy about all material contributions.
>>
>> That said...
>>
>> I don't see the point of the "non-voting council member" special
>> treatment at
>> all; I draw a hard line there. Council meetings are public and usually
>> unmoderated, and constructive comments are always welcome. No special
>> rules
>> needed (and also no special rules possible, but I don't intend to hide
>> behind
>> formalities).
>>
>> My suggestion would be
>> * you contribute (which is fully enough to say "Daniel is back and
>> helping out
>> Gentoo!")
>> * you get to know people, and people get to know you
>> * and you (try to) get elected to the council like everybody else.
>>
>> Let's be honest, I barely know you, and I've been around for about 7 years
>> now. (That's much longer than you ever were Gentoo developer by the
>> way...)
>>
>> And we should also take into consideration that George Santayana quote,
>> "Those
>> Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It." I made it my task to
>> read
>> up old e-mail threads and logs, and you then stumble upon
>> https://lwn.net/
>> Articles/224615/ <https://lwn.net/Articles/224615/> ...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andreas
>>
>> --
>> Andreas K. Hüttel
>> dilfridge@gentoo.org
>> Gentoo Linux developer
>> (council, toolchain, perl, libreoffice, comrel)
>>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7425 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Matthew Thode]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2963 bytes --]

Snipped down for size, replies inline.

On 17-12-08 16:40:50, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> 
> FWIW, I have applied to be a non-committing Gentoo developer. Zac Medio is
> my mentor, so I will be completing that process. I have interest in being
> involved in the following roles:
> 
> 1) Council. I would be happy to participate in council meetings. Just know
> that if I were invited to participate, I would.
> 
> 2) Trustees. I notice that we only have four trustees. I would be happy to
> serve as the 'fifth Beatle' which would legally obligate me in my role as
> trustee to represent the interests of the Gentoo Foundation and the health
> of the project, and coordinate with attorneys, etc.
> 

Prety sure there's 5 of us.  At least there were at the last meeting :D
Here's our up to date info atm. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Foundation:Main_Page
We run monthly meetings as well.  We don't run closed meetings or
moderate them too much, so watching one or tactfully speaking in one should be
fine.

> 3) Contributor. I will continue to work with Zac Medico on resolving
> various obscure Portage bugs (often this is more of an IRC discussion and
> exploration of possibilities to solve the problem, which results in some
> kind of definitive plan to address a long-standing bug.) I am also planning
> to work with robbat2 on a genkernel rewrite and am open to other areas of
> collaboration, both personally and between Gentoo and Funtoo.
> 

Glad to have more eyes and hands on that code, also happy to see you going down
the path of becoming a developer again.

> 4) Metastructure. I would like to start thinking about how to build a
> positive future for those very senior Gentoo developers who have
> traditionally experienced burn-out and cynicism.
> 

I'd need to hear more here before commenting, but there was an attempt (about
a year ago, by me even) to try to change the metastructure to be more like a
clasical business (or even a 'tree' structure) instead of our current 'two-
headed-beast'.  It didn't go so well...

> 5) Fund-raising. I would ideally like to see the Gentoo Foundation have an
> operating budget of around .5M USD. I think this is an achievable goal.
> This means having a positive vision for Gentoo that we can communicate
> outwards and that resonates with the world.
> 

I imagine that this is an annual operating budget?  I don't think we've recieved
that much in donations in our lifetime as a distro.  While more money is better
than less, it doesn't mean we should spend it without some dicipline.

> 6) Collaboration. I have some interesting ideas for how we can build
> win-win relationships with Google, Sony and other organizations that are
> using Gentoo -- we can do more than we are doing now.
> 
> 7) Developer. Ongoing work on Portage and genkernel, and other areas.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Daniel
> 

-- 
Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2600 bytes --]

>>>>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, Daniel Robbins wrote:

> Looking at my past, I think you may find it a familiar trajectory
> that resonates with a lot of senior Gentoo contributors: unbridled
> youthful enthusiasm, which then turns into incredible productivity
> and growth, then additional burdens, responsibilities and demands,
> resulting in eventual burn-out and cynicism. I was the first
> astronaut to be launched into orbit, so to speak, so I got to
> experience this fantastic voyage first -- but I am sure you know
> others who have followed in my foot-steps in this area. So I think
> the point you raise is actually important, but it should not be
> presented as a personal attack on me, but as a general weakness in
> Gentoo related to mentorship, growth and direction for senior-level
> Gentoo contributors and providing them with positive (good for the
> project, good for them) outlets for their immense talent, while
> preventing their incredible influence gained within the project from
> turning into a negative and causing internal strife.

This seems to be a rather crude theory. For example, you say that it
"resonates with a lot of senior Gentoo contributors", so do you have
any hard numbers supporting that claim?

Not sure if I qualify as what you call a "senior contributor", but
I don't feel like being burned out (how would that even be possible,
for something that I do for the fun of it, and from which I can take
a break whenever I want). Also someone please tell me if my
contributions have turned into a negative; if so, I shall retire
tomorrow.

> [...] I think that the solution to this is to have a vision of
> forward evolution and growth of the project --

What does this mean? I can have a vision that we shall have 500 active
developers by next year, but that wouldn't actually solve any problem
of recruitment.

> we need new, bigger challenges and our most senior people need to
> 'graduate' into playing a leading role in shaping the future of
> technology. We all need to support one another instead of fighting
> amongst each other.

Again, I don't understand how you come to that conclusion. Can you
provide us with recent examples of developers fighting against each
other? The majority of developers (both "senior" and "junior", though
I dislike the categorising) quietly do their work, and my impression
is that our technical discussions are factual. Of course this doesn't
preclude that there are different opinions.

For a more concrete question, IIUC you have recently followed Portage
development. Did you perceive any fighting in that project?

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3142 bytes --]

Ulrich,

I am not implying that there is constant bickering on the project.

My observations are based on the retirement of vapier, and private
conversations I have had with very senior people on the project (will not
disclose who.)

And yes, there is some conflict in regards to the future direction of
Portage, but this conflict is not really out in the open.

-Daniel


On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:56 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:

> >>>>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, Daniel Robbins wrote:
>
> > Looking at my past, I think you may find it a familiar trajectory
> > that resonates with a lot of senior Gentoo contributors: unbridled
> > youthful enthusiasm, which then turns into incredible productivity
> > and growth, then additional burdens, responsibilities and demands,
> > resulting in eventual burn-out and cynicism. I was the first
> > astronaut to be launched into orbit, so to speak, so I got to
> > experience this fantastic voyage first -- but I am sure you know
> > others who have followed in my foot-steps in this area. So I think
> > the point you raise is actually important, but it should not be
> > presented as a personal attack on me, but as a general weakness in
> > Gentoo related to mentorship, growth and direction for senior-level
> > Gentoo contributors and providing them with positive (good for the
> > project, good for them) outlets for their immense talent, while
> > preventing their incredible influence gained within the project from
> > turning into a negative and causing internal strife.
>
> This seems to be a rather crude theory. For example, you say that it
> "resonates with a lot of senior Gentoo contributors", so do you have
> any hard numbers supporting that claim?
>
> Not sure if I qualify as what you call a "senior contributor", but
> I don't feel like being burned out (how would that even be possible,
> for something that I do for the fun of it, and from which I can take
> a break whenever I want). Also someone please tell me if my
> contributions have turned into a negative; if so, I shall retire
> tomorrow.
>
> > [...] I think that the solution to this is to have a vision of
> > forward evolution and growth of the project --
>
> What does this mean? I can have a vision that we shall have 500 active
> developers by next year, but that wouldn't actually solve any problem
> of recruitment.
>
> > we need new, bigger challenges and our most senior people need to
> > 'graduate' into playing a leading role in shaping the future of
> > technology. We all need to support one another instead of fighting
> > amongst each other.
>
> Again, I don't understand how you come to that conclusion. Can you
> provide us with recent examples of developers fighting against each
> other? The majority of developers (both "senior" and "junior", though
> I dislike the categorising) quietly do their work, and my impression
> is that our technical discussions are factual. Of course this doesn't
> preclude that there are different opinions.
>
> For a more concrete question, IIUC you have recently followed Portage
> development. Did you perceive any fighting in that project?
>
> Ulrich
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3971 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3460 bytes --]

Also, my use of 'senior' refers to 'seniority' -- i.e. those who have been
around a long time. Typically that also correlates with influence on the
project.

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Daniel Robbins <drobbins@funtoo.org> wrote:

> Ulrich,
>
> I am not implying that there is constant bickering on the project.
>
> My observations are based on the retirement of vapier, and private
> conversations I have had with very senior people on the project (will not
> disclose who.)
>
> And yes, there is some conflict in regards to the future direction of
> Portage, but this conflict is not really out in the open.
>
> -Daniel
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:56 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> >>>>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, Daniel Robbins wrote:
>>
>> > Looking at my past, I think you may find it a familiar trajectory
>> > that resonates with a lot of senior Gentoo contributors: unbridled
>> > youthful enthusiasm, which then turns into incredible productivity
>> > and growth, then additional burdens, responsibilities and demands,
>> > resulting in eventual burn-out and cynicism. I was the first
>> > astronaut to be launched into orbit, so to speak, so I got to
>> > experience this fantastic voyage first -- but I am sure you know
>> > others who have followed in my foot-steps in this area. So I think
>> > the point you raise is actually important, but it should not be
>> > presented as a personal attack on me, but as a general weakness in
>> > Gentoo related to mentorship, growth and direction for senior-level
>> > Gentoo contributors and providing them with positive (good for the
>> > project, good for them) outlets for their immense talent, while
>> > preventing their incredible influence gained within the project from
>> > turning into a negative and causing internal strife.
>>
>> This seems to be a rather crude theory. For example, you say that it
>> "resonates with a lot of senior Gentoo contributors", so do you have
>> any hard numbers supporting that claim?
>>
>> Not sure if I qualify as what you call a "senior contributor", but
>> I don't feel like being burned out (how would that even be possible,
>> for something that I do for the fun of it, and from which I can take
>> a break whenever I want). Also someone please tell me if my
>> contributions have turned into a negative; if so, I shall retire
>> tomorrow.
>>
>> > [...] I think that the solution to this is to have a vision of
>> > forward evolution and growth of the project --
>>
>> What does this mean? I can have a vision that we shall have 500 active
>> developers by next year, but that wouldn't actually solve any problem
>> of recruitment.
>>
>> > we need new, bigger challenges and our most senior people need to
>> > 'graduate' into playing a leading role in shaping the future of
>> > technology. We all need to support one another instead of fighting
>> > amongst each other.
>>
>> Again, I don't understand how you come to that conclusion. Can you
>> provide us with recent examples of developers fighting against each
>> other? The majority of developers (both "senior" and "junior", though
>> I dislike the categorising) quietly do their work, and my impression
>> is that our technical discussions are factual. Of course this doesn't
>> preclude that there are different opinions.
>>
>> For a more concrete question, IIUC you have recently followed Portage
>> development. Did you perceive any fighting in that project?
>>
>> Ulrich
>>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4616 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3798 bytes --]

Hey Matthew,

Oops! I scrolled down to 'Trustee Responsibilities' and missed the whole
infobox at the top of the Trustees page. I am available to the trustees to
help out as needed.

Regarding metastructure, I think we can add thing that do not interfere
with existing processes to do what I'm talking about. It should not require
any changes or overhauls to the current metastructure. It just provides
more of a path of professional growth for the more senior devs.

And yes, the budget goal is orders of magnitude larger than where Gentoo
has been, and agreed on spending it with discipline. But of course, more
funds opens the possibility for new things.

Regards,

Daniel


On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:07 PM, Matthew Thode <prometheanfire@gentoo.org>
wrote:

> Snipped down for size, replies inline.
>
> On 17-12-08 16:40:50, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> > Hi Andreas,
> >
> > FWIW, I have applied to be a non-committing Gentoo developer. Zac Medio
> is
> > my mentor, so I will be completing that process. I have interest in being
> > involved in the following roles:
> >
> > 1) Council. I would be happy to participate in council meetings. Just
> know
> > that if I were invited to participate, I would.
> >
> > 2) Trustees. I notice that we only have four trustees. I would be happy
> to
> > serve as the 'fifth Beatle' which would legally obligate me in my role as
> > trustee to represent the interests of the Gentoo Foundation and the
> health
> > of the project, and coordinate with attorneys, etc.
> >
>
> Prety sure there's 5 of us.  At least there were at the last meeting :D
> Here's our up to date info atm. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/
> Foundation:Main_Page
> We run monthly meetings as well.  We don't run closed meetings or
> moderate them too much, so watching one or tactfully speaking in one
> should be
> fine.
>
> > 3) Contributor. I will continue to work with Zac Medico on resolving
> > various obscure Portage bugs (often this is more of an IRC discussion and
> > exploration of possibilities to solve the problem, which results in some
> > kind of definitive plan to address a long-standing bug.) I am also
> planning
> > to work with robbat2 on a genkernel rewrite and am open to other areas of
> > collaboration, both personally and between Gentoo and Funtoo.
> >
>
> Glad to have more eyes and hands on that code, also happy to see you going
> down
> the path of becoming a developer again.
>
> > 4) Metastructure. I would like to start thinking about how to build a
> > positive future for those very senior Gentoo developers who have
> > traditionally experienced burn-out and cynicism.
> >
>
> I'd need to hear more here before commenting, but there was an attempt
> (about
> a year ago, by me even) to try to change the metastructure to be more like
> a
> clasical business (or even a 'tree' structure) instead of our current 'two-
> headed-beast'.  It didn't go so well...
>
> > 5) Fund-raising. I would ideally like to see the Gentoo Foundation have
> an
> > operating budget of around .5M USD. I think this is an achievable goal.
> > This means having a positive vision for Gentoo that we can communicate
> > outwards and that resonates with the world.
> >
>
> I imagine that this is an annual operating budget?  I don't think we've
> recieved
> that much in donations in our lifetime as a distro.  While more money is
> better
> than less, it doesn't mean we should spend it without some dicipline.
>
> > 6) Collaboration. I have some interesting ideas for how we can build
> > win-win relationships with Google, Sony and other organizations that are
> > using Gentoo -- we can do more than we are doing now.
> >
> > 7) Developer. Ongoing work on Portage and genkernel, and other areas.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Daniel
> >
>
> --
> Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4905 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4928 bytes --]

Hey Raymond,

Yes, the love of Gentoo is what we should be focusing on! Gentoo is an
amazing distro and community -- our passion should fuel us to think big and
set some ambitious goals for the future. Our concern for our senior
contributors should motivate us to make sure that they get as much benefit
as possible from their involvement with Gentoo and continued to be both
challenged and supported. Like you point out, often people will 'graduate'
to a full-time job related to Gentoo in some way. I would like to explore
the possibility of building these bridges with internships and other
collaborative activities with Google, Sony and others.

-Daniel

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Raymond Jennings <shentino@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Speaking as someone who has had a less than stellar ride on the
> recruiting process, but who somehow managed to get foundation
> membership due to non-code and non-ebuild related contributions, as
> well as a patch in the linux kernel.
>
> I LOVE gentoo, as a user.  I have been an avid gentoo user ever since
> a friend of mine told me about.
>
> The control over my machine, nothing hard coded, nothing getting in my
> way when I need to tell my computer what to do and how to do it.  Of
> course, it doesn't much save me when I shoot myself in the foot, but
> honestly, I'd rather do that than have stuff hard-coded that I can't
> change.
>
> I love being able to set my machine up the way I need it, and it's
> proving to, perhaps on topic further, serve as the foundation of a
> growing file the recruiters at google are building on me as a
> potential candidate.  Gentoo might actually help me get a job if it
> continues to give me an education on software engineering and system
> administration.  Would be a welcome upgrade to my life of being a
> disabled "basement dweller"
>
> And Gentoo actually inspired me in a way to get my computer and
> networking gear hooked up to a UPS device...which actually saved my
> family from some otherwise intense grief during a power failure when I
> was able to use my UPS powered internet connection to look up the
> power company's phone number.
>
> Using x11vnc (encrypted, and through a SSH tunnel) also gave me some
> hands on practice at remote system administration, using my own gentoo
> powered desktop as a guinea pig and my android phone from afar across
> the cloud to get back into my machine...and then putting up a tunnel
> after noticing some alien IPs were pinging my x11vnc server :P.
>
> All in all, Gentoo has been an EXTREMELY positive influence in my
> life, both personally, hobby wise, and hopefully a solid base going
> forward if/when my career gets started as a software engineer.
>
> So whatever it takes to keep Gentoo being the most awesome linux
> distro I have seen yet, has my approval.  I joined the foundation for
> a reason.
>
> Speaking of which, what would the trustees of the foundation say about
> this conversation?  I'm assuming that they're designed to be more than
> asset monkeys.
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Christopher Díaz Riveros
> <chrisadr@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > El mié, 06-12-2017 a las 09:53 -0700, Daniel Robbins escribió:
> >>   3. I will continue to work with members of the Gentoo dev team on
> >> various development-related projects. If, for running for council, I
> >> am required to be a Gentoo developer, I can go through the
> >> recruitment process. However, I am frankly happy working with Gentoo
> >> developers as I am doing now and I feel like it is less likely to
> >> cause problems if I do NOT have direct commit access to Gentoo repos.
> >> So maybe the council could vote an exception to my need to have
> >> access to the Gentoo repos. I think this would make it easier for
> >> everyone -- people would not need to worry that I would subvert
> >> existing processes. And I see no reason why I need direct commit
> >> access.
> >>
> >
> > Just to mention that if that's the case you can always take the non-
> > commit developer quiz [1]. That way you'll meet all the requirements in
> > the election rules. And it's a good way to refresh all the basic
> > knowledge about the procedures and structure.
> >
> >> intention to run for council. Then hopefully we can focus on bigger
> >> issues like actually making Gentoo better and more fun :)
> >>
> >> Let me know what you think.
> >>
> >
> > Personally I like the idea of Gentoo and Funtoo having more
> > collaboration among each other, and I think that the primary goal is
> > and always will be to make Gentoo better.
> >
> >
> > [1]: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Recruiters/Quiz#Quiz_selectio
> > n_2
> >
> > Best regards,
> > --
> > Christopher Díaz Riveros
> > Gentoo Linux Developer
> > GPG Fingerprint: E517 5ECB 8152 98E4 FEBC  2BAA 4DBB D10F 0FDD 2547
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5894 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Alexander Berntsen]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 512 bytes --]

On 09/12/17 18:29, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> And yes, there is some conflict in regards to the future direction of
> Portage, but this conflict is not really out in the open.
There is? Speaking as the former lead dev, who just asked the current
lead dev (Brian) -- we in the Portage team don't know of any conflict
about "the future direction of Portage," so if there is a secret plot
going on somewhere, it doesn't involve us.

-- 
Alexander
bernalex@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2802 bytes --]

Hey Alex,

Yes, correct, it doesn't involve you :) I am aware of some dynamics that
you are not.

I do not want to alarm anyone -- I don't think things are about to implode.
But I do bring up my areas of suggestion for a reason. They are based on
facts and first-hand conversations. I was asked by Ulrich if I was aware of
some dysfunction related to #gentoo-portage -- I wouldn't have brought it
up if not asked directly -- but I definitely am aware. It does not manifest
in the channel in any obvious way, but it's there and it involves valuable
people to the project, on both sides, and some amount of animosity. Rather
than focus on the problem, I would rather focus on the solution, and I
think the solution is to positively engage with and have a plan for senior
developers, one that creates enthusiasm and positive movement, eases some
pent-up frustration points for various people and supports people in making
a difference. I am trying to assist where I can. But we need to be able to
acknowledge the problem before we can actually have any hope of addressing
it.

Again, the sky is not falling and I see an overwhelming amount of positive
direction in regards to Gentoo as a whole. But I also do see areas of
improvement. Gentoo has not 'arrived' at perfection. Yet the impossibility
of perfection isn't an excuse to not tackle the current challenges on the
horizon. At least, that is my opinion.

My point is simply that yes, my observations are real and I think pertinent
to the continued positive direction of the project. I'm not saying that to
spread FUD -- but instead to suggest that Gentoo could be so much better if
we found a way for the project to, say, engage with vapier in a positive
way rather than have him leave in frustration, as one example (and frankly
a big enough example that it should suffice to provide ample evidence for
the reality of what I am saying to anyone who questions its existence.)

I am looking at what we could be if we didn't just accept these incidents
as inevitable and acceptable losses but looked at them as challenges to
overcome and make us better for the next time. The idea of doing that is
something I find personally exciting.

-Daniel

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Alexander Berntsen <bernalex@gentoo.org>
wrote:

> On 09/12/17 18:29, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> > And yes, there is some conflict in regards to the future direction of
> > Portage, but this conflict is not really out in the open.
> There is? Speaking as the former lead dev, who just asked the current
> lead dev (Brian) -- we in the Portage team don't know of any conflict
> about "the future direction of Portage," so if there is a secret plot
> going on somewhere, it doesn't involve us.
>
> --
> Alexander
> bernalex@gentoo.org
> https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3575 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8252 bytes --]

Hi All,

Just want to follow up for anyone following this thread.

I did participate in my first council meeting! Thanks to all council
members for facilitating that.

I'm going to continue to work on becoming a non-committing developer with
my mentor, Zac Medico.

I also had about 30 mins to chat in #gentoo-portage and outlined a plan for
moving Portage into the next generation. I am going to work on both an
architecture, as well as a roadmap, with the supervision of Zac Medico and
contribution of Zac Medico and others. This will be a fairly detailed
document that is going to provide a path so that we can evolve the existing
Portage code base organically and with as little disruption as possible to
a multi-core-leveraging and very capable modular package manager.

There are a lot of people who care a ton about Gentoo and Portage but there
is a bit of a deadlock about what next steps to take with its evolution.
The conflict I referred to earlier in #gentoo-portage was about whether to
scrap our package manager code base entirely or continue to evolve it.
There is a lot of passion around this issue. I didn't want to give too many
details about the conversations since the conversations I had were in
private, and the gossipy details aren't really relevant to the technical
effort. But I don't think I gave enough context so it sounded to some that
I was "causing trouble" by stirring up a hornet's nest. My apologies --
that was not my intention.

Back to the technical stuff. The proposal will attempt to strike a
reasonable middle ground -- modularization of the current code base, which
will start by creating two packages -- "ebuild" -- a PMS-compliant build
system, and "emerge" -- the upper-half dependency resolver and associated
tools, between which there will be a clearly documented API. This will both
allow us to play around with potential ebuild replacements (with no
commitment -- these can be done as side projects and we can decide to adopt
one once it proves its merit) as well as more capable multi-threaded emerge
replacements. While it may be nice to consider focusing development on
replacing ebuild, we need it continue to function and a rewrite will just
introduce too many annoying build bugs for users. So it's better to
maintain it as-is until something better is adopted. In the transition, our
package manager can support BOTH formats and they can interoperate (an
ebuild can depend on a "newbuild", and vice versa.) allowing for a gradual
and smooth transition of repos (main tree, overlays, projects, other
distros) to the new format. The separation of ebuild/emerge also opens up
the potential for use of some parts of non-official build systems by
hooking into our API, such as pkgcore and paludis, as desired. (While this
won't be part of our official plan, interested parties who want to pursue
this work will be supported.)

I think the one goal everyone can agree on is that sophisticated dependency
resolution does stand to benefit greatly from multi-core processors, so
there will be a roadmap to evolve the top half (emerge) so that it is
multi-core capable. This will essentially be a rewrite of emerge. In the
mean-time, the single-threaded version will continue to be maintained. The
multi-threaded version will be done in-house (in Gentoo-land.) I will also
try to specify some useful functionality for the top-half that I think we
should incorporate into our next-generation architecture. This may involve
the definition of a new spec so that pkgcore and paludis can incorporate
and leverage this functionality as well.

I will plan to incorporate feedback from developers and in particular
current and former Portage developers so that concerns are addressed. I'm
building the general skeleton of the architecture -- there will be quite a
bit that will be left to flesh out by others. I have been thinking about
how to tackle Portage's monolithic code base for years and I want to get my
ideas formalized and written down. It's exciting to think that we could be
finally doing this :)

I am sharing this all in the interest of transparency and will continue to
be transparent and communicate regularly about progress. Realistically I
will not be able to start this effort until the new year. I wish you all a
great new year and holiday season, and look forward some awesome
collaboration in 2018!

For the sake of keeping gentoo-project on topic, consider this a simple
status update of what drobbins is up to and how he's collaborating with
Gentoo, so that there is no mystery. Any replies related directly to the
Portage proposal -- whether you like the ideas, whether you want me to
contribute or not, whether you dislike pkgcore or paludis being mentioned
or not, whether you like the idea of splitting portage into ebuild/emerge
or not, whether repoman demonstrates that this is a bad idea or not,
whether you want to write it in rust, C++ or go or not -- that conversation
doesn't belong on this list. Nor is it worth engaging in technical
conversation until I have a document that is ready for public review. I
will share ideas and gather feedback informally in #gentoo-portage as I
work on the document. Consider all of this a fun thing to reflect on over
the holidays :)

Take care, everyone --

Daniel

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Daniel Robbins <drobbins@funtoo.org> wrote:

> Hey Alex,
>
> Yes, correct, it doesn't involve you :) I am aware of some dynamics that
> you are not.
>
> I do not want to alarm anyone -- I don't think things are about to
> implode. But I do bring up my areas of suggestion for a reason. They are
> based on facts and first-hand conversations. I was asked by Ulrich if I was
> aware of some dysfunction related to #gentoo-portage -- I wouldn't have
> brought it up if not asked directly -- but I definitely am aware. It does
> not manifest in the channel in any obvious way, but it's there and it
> involves valuable people to the project, on both sides, and some amount of
> animosity. Rather than focus on the problem, I would rather focus on the
> solution, and I think the solution is to positively engage with and have a
> plan for senior developers, one that creates enthusiasm and positive
> movement, eases some pent-up frustration points for various people and
> supports people in making a difference. I am trying to assist where I can.
> But we need to be able to acknowledge the problem before we can actually
> have any hope of addressing it.
>
> Again, the sky is not falling and I see an overwhelming amount of positive
> direction in regards to Gentoo as a whole. But I also do see areas of
> improvement. Gentoo has not 'arrived' at perfection. Yet the impossibility
> of perfection isn't an excuse to not tackle the current challenges on the
> horizon. At least, that is my opinion.
>
> My point is simply that yes, my observations are real and I think
> pertinent to the continued positive direction of the project. I'm not
> saying that to spread FUD -- but instead to suggest that Gentoo could be so
> much better if we found a way for the project to, say, engage with vapier
> in a positive way rather than have him leave in frustration, as one example
> (and frankly a big enough example that it should suffice to provide ample
> evidence for the reality of what I am saying to anyone who questions its
> existence.)
>
> I am looking at what we could be if we didn't just accept these incidents
> as inevitable and acceptable losses but looked at them as challenges to
> overcome and make us better for the next time. The idea of doing that is
> something I find personally exciting.
>
> -Daniel
>
> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Alexander Berntsen <bernalex@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On 09/12/17 18:29, Daniel Robbins wrote:
>> > And yes, there is some conflict in regards to the future direction of
>> > Portage, but this conflict is not really out in the open.
>> There is? Speaking as the former lead dev, who just asked the current
>> lead dev (Brian) -- we in the Portage team don't know of any conflict
>> about "the future direction of Portage," so if there is a secret plot
>> going on somewhere, it doesn't involve us.
>>
>> --
>> Alexander
>> bernalex@gentoo.org
>> https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
>>
>>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 9732 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Matthias Maier]

Hi Daniel,

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017, at 13:01 CST, Daniel Robbins <drobbins@funtoo.org> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Just want to follow up for anyone following this thread.

Your help on Portage development is certainly appreciated. And I am
happy to hear that the bus factor of the portage project will go up a
bit (it is too close to 1 at the moment). 

> For the sake of keeping gentoo-project on topic, consider this a simple
> status update of what drobbins is up to and how he's collaborating with
> Gentoo, so that there is no mystery. [...]

(Commenting on a number of previous e-mails from you:)

<developer and council hat>

I suggest we all try to keep history and politics a bit out of the
discussion. Meaning your contributions are very much appreciated. But I
think that currently is not the right time for discussing some special
council/developer status (or similar).

I think it will certainly help if we all (meaning the developer
community and you) get a bit acquainted to each other. Some targeted,
project related work and contributions from you are a perfect
opportunity for that. I suggest we spend a couple of months on that
first and touch bases again in spring next year about becoming a
(regular) developer again.

For future posts, what about we relocate development updates on Portage
to gentoo-dev? (We're working on whitelists for contributors.) I am
certainly interested in getting a bit of details about Portage
development - further, input from our PMS team and other package
managers might be a good idea.

Best,
Matthias

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Alexander Berntsen]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 460 bytes --]

On 12/12/17 20:34, Matthias Maier wrote:
> For future posts, what about we relocate development updates on
> Portage to gentoo-dev? (We're working on whitelists for
> contributors.) I am certainly interested in getting a bit of details
> about Portage development - further, input from our PMS team and
> other package managers might be a good idea.
Portage already has a ML.
-- 
Alexander
bernalex@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: A plan for Gentoo

[Matthias Maier]

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017, at 13:36 CST, Alexander Berntsen <bernalex@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Portage already has a ML.

... or even better, the portage mailing list :-)

Thanks for the clarification!
Matthias