Re: [gentoo-project] Merging Trustees and Council / Developers and Foundation - 1.0 reply

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

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5070 bytes --]

On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 7:55:30 PM EST Michał Górny wrote:
>
> What if I *have* to opt out because of my employment or local law? For
> example, if my contract forbids me from being *enlisted*
> in corporations working in the IT sector?

If you cannot be a member, you likely cannot be a developer. Do you have a 
specific scenario or just hypothetical?

If you look into any real scenario, the same restrictions that would prevent 
membership in the Foundation would prevent you from being a developer.
 
> It's easy to argue whether things can or can't happen but will you
> defend me against a lawsuit from my employer? Will the Foundation
> guarantee that? As I see it, keeping a low profile should be
> developer's right.

Keeping a low profile would be being a member of the Foundation and NOT being a 
developer. Soon as you make your first commit, you are not flying under the 
radar. Votes are secret, commits are not.

> We are individuals who can get along eventually and make a pretty
> decent distro as a result. For some time already.

For some time now Gentoo has been losing interest. I am not sure many outside 
Gentoo would consider Gentoo a decent distro.

Does one want to be decent, or a leading mainstream distro?
 
> > > How can a user who has barely any contact with Gentoo developers be
> > > able to choose good candidates for the Council?
> > 
> > Users would never have ability to vote for Council. Foundation members can
> > only vote for Foundation stuff. Which Council voting would be left to
> > Developers.
> 
> ...which would be meaningless with Trustees having the power to
> override pretty much everything for no apparent reason.

Trustees have the power to do that now. Trustees have legal authority over 
Gentoo. I cannot see Trustees, plural, overriding any decision for no reason.

That is not saying much of people who are part of the project, developers, and 
have been elected to their positions as Trustees.

> I'm afraid we don't understand each other. I still don't see how
> liability is different for person who is a *member* of the Foundation,
> and for a developer who is not a member of the Foundation.

I do not think you have an understanding of Liability from a legal perspective 
in the US or your own country. That may differ from country to country. In the 
US liability is a big deal. Lots of frivolous law suits and others that are 
quite costly all around.

I know clients who have really upset their customers due to liability 
restrictions from their Insurers. Which I do not believe Gentoo has any 
insurance, umbrella or other that can help mitigate any financial repercussions 
in the event of some suit.
  
> So why are the people who don't want to be developers privileged over
> people who don't want to be Foundation members?

Where are you getting that they are privileged? Not sure where you are getting 
that from. Maybe they cannot legally be a developer. But they could vote as a 
member.

> You can protect Gentoo from liability without having total control over
> every aspect of Gentoo. There's a difference between power to make
> decisions that prevent liability and power to make any decisions.

I am quite aware. That said entities in Gentoo should not be taking action 
without consideration of legal implication. Which includes actions taken by 
say Comrel or Council.

Like it or not, Trustees have all the power. They just do not exercise such, 
and I am not advocating they go crazy. There has never been power abuses and I 
do not forsee such. I have more faith in fellow Gentoo developers and 
community members.
 
> > > It's not perfect but I believe Gentoo could prevail. Maybe it'd even be
> > > beneficial long-term, since it would let the developers actually doing
> > > a lot of work to split from those who mostly talk. Pretty much getting
> > > Gentoo back to the roots, as Daniel Robbins seen it.
> > 
> > That is not how Daniel sees it, and does not agree with such separation.
> > That is what people need to understand. What Gentoo has become it was not
> > intended to be, nor did it start that way.
> 
> http://www.funtoo.org/Making_the_Distribution,_Part_1

I am aware by talking to Daniel directly....

> And here we are, arguing that Gentoo should be lead by people 'who
> aren't writing any code (nor do they have any intention to). Instead they
> spend their time talking about more important things. You know, those
> managerial issues'.

Did Steve Jobs write code? Did he make the iPhone? Does Larry Ellison write 
code? What about Mark Zuckerberg? Or Larry and Serge? They all may have at one 
time but do they today?

The world works this way now. Most people who write code, make things, etc for 
a living. They likely have a boss who does not. This is rather foolish.

Sorry Engineers, programmers, and others do not always know what is best. 
Companies have leadership, boards, officers, bosses for a reason.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

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