[gentoo-project] Gentoo conflicts and leadership

["William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4183 bytes --]

Starting a new thread, so others can filter.

> On Thursday, January 5, 2017 2:15:34 PM EST Rich Freeman wrote:
> Two things:
> 
> First, serious conflicts are actually pretty rare.  Sure, they're in
> the spotlight right now because we've had one of those
> once-in-a-few-years big incidents.

Somewhat, with regard to myself, I am tired of watching it happen over the 
years and doing nothing. I thought it was just me, but years of observation 
has shown its a much larger problem, going back to people like Ciaran and 
before. That I chose a year that other stuff was going on, was just by 
coincidence.

I had long mentioned taking things on list on by bug for years. I just held 
back and finally the dam broke.

> Second, conflicts don't actually result in quagmires.  Life moves on.
> We don't have difficulty deciding what to do with problematic people.
> A decision gets made, and sometimes it is appealed, and then a final
> decision gets made.

Hardly, Gentoo Java has been stagnant in may ways for years. That is 
essentially a quagmire. New Java devs are few and far between. But it is not 
just Java lacking. I love how people say Gentoo is lacking man power, then 
turn around sand say its not in a  quagmire. If you lack man power, clearly 
things are not getting done. So some things are not moving on.

Ebuilds with no EAPI, cruft that needs to be updated, removed etc. Lots of 
stuff in tree far beyond Java.

> I'm not sure why you think Gentoo uses consensus-based
> decision-making. 

Because it is lead by pleasing the developers. Any action that developers do 
not agree with is not taken. That is consensus.

From what I have observed the council is routinely polling for topics, and 
hardly presenting new ones. I do not see leadership. If decisions are not 
voted on or made by all developers, seems they are not taking place.

Nothing has changed on Foundation side, I do not see much happening anywhere.

> Most big things happen simply by announcing them on
> the lists and then change happens.  Sometimes it is controversial, so
> then it waits for the next Council meeting, assuming the Council even
> needs to deal with it as opposed to a project team.  Then the decision
> is made, and life moves on.

Where is the leadership coming from the council? The council coming up with 
some direction for Gentoo?

Is there any direction?

The council was supposed to lead the project technically. I do not see such 
happening. Here is an example, just happens to relate to Java.
http://www.funtoo.org/Java_Configuration_Design_Update

Where are the council produced GLEPs? 

> Now, what we don't do is have the Council just come out with policies
> out of nowhere that nobody else agrees with.  That isn't being
> decisive, that is just being stupid when you're a volunteer-based
> organization.  Sure, many of our decisions are compromises, but they
> tend to be compromises that make sense.
 
No that is leadership. Leaders come up with ideas to benefit those they lead. 
They should not solely rely on what others feel should be done, etc. There are 
many times leaders must take things in directions people disagree with at 
first, but sometimes tend to be the right thing in the long run.

For example, things like SLFC was discussed regarding Gentoo long ago. If 
Gentoo ever did that, there would be a percentage that disagree. Those same 
people may or may not want to be involved in the foundation. But really such 
decisions should not be left to them but say the Trustees. They vote for and 
elect the Trustees. Thus any direction and decision they agree on, should not 
be challenged per se. If you do not like it, you elect different ones next 
time.

I believe you, Rich have stated exactly that about your opinions and such. If 
people do not like it, vote for someone else for council right? But that does 
not mean you should be micro managed as a council member. To an extent your 
opinion does outweigh others. You were democratically elected by a majority to 
represent them. Not for them to approve everything you do.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]