From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JGajd-00042d-Bh for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:01:17 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4CD66E0AC1; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:01:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05C20E0A82 for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:01:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86DDB65B36 for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:01:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: 1.01 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.01 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-1.058, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WpC0nA+E5qfM for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:01:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A46A65AFF for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:01:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JGajK-0001ff-NZ for gentoo-project@gentoo.org; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:00:58 +0000 Received: from 82.152.203.234 ([82.152.203.234]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:00:58 +0000 Received: from slong by 82.152.203.234 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:00:58 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org From: Steve Long Subject: [gentoo-project] Re: Re: A proposal to get out of this mess Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:07:37 +0000 Message-ID: References: <42ebd5dc0801141711m30bc22bv2721d86d81ae4990@mail.gmail.com> <478C7044.2070402@gmail.com> <42ebd5dc0801150131rd5d6134sbbb8bfa2bdc2c9bf@mail.gmail.com> <478C8596.80005@gmail.com> <42ebd5dc0801150329g785478a5h7c95500d1de1dda6@mail.gmail.com> <20080115125109.13145wo79hytzfis@www2.mailstation.de> <42ebd5dc0801150505y4a355a7cx59d5ae178926d8f2@mail.gmail.com> <20080115141517.79027d1wf1obnkg8@www2.mailstation.de> <42ebd5dc0801150538oee57010g5947baee582b56fa@mail.gmail.com> <411a9f890801191507s1e845699t2e4321b6961667d6@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.152.203.234 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4 Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 65d837a3-4322-4287-9de1-8cb96b7d6aa6 X-Archives-Hash: 3156987670ce5d9cf3735f65ecdf2d70 Daniel Butzu wrote: > On 1/19/08, Steve Long wrote: > >> For the record: I'd still like drobbins involved, but I don't think his >> terms were at all reasonable, and the way he went about it was >> reprehensible imo. It was designed to cause the furore it did, and only >> makes me give credence to the argument that much of the negative press on >> distrowatch has come from an associate of his. It was a totally political >> move, and not at all motivated by concern for Gentoo afaic. If he cared >> that much, he'd have approached Mr Goodyear privately or on the nfp list >> if he wanted to be "open". Not put everyone through all this stress. >> > Maybe. However, since it caused the furore it did it seems that a lot > of users were unsatisfied. >> Users used to feel just as excluded when drobbins was in charge There appears to be some myth going round that everything was sweetness and light back in those days; it's not true, and further the distro was an absolute pig to maintain: "I used Gentoo when it was version 0.7, which was omg broken. Packages were added to portage and this would be stable, that would not compile at all. Then you had to re-sync to compile it, so in a day, you would need to re-sync portage 3 or 4 times to get everything to compile. :P ..Even still back in the 1.4 days, people really had no idea what to do." > You can't stir up something when there is nothing to stir up. Actually I think this whole drama shows that you can, or at least you can draw attention to one thing (lack of paperwork) and pretend it means something else (Gentoo is dying! Again!) People like drama. > So maybe we should focus more on our problems today, since we were unable > of doing it yesterday. Er yeah, maybe you'd like to discuss those then? That was what the rest of my mail was about. >> I've openly stated that I think user involvement and conduct on the dev >> m-l are the biggest problems I see. As in, how do we constructively change those? Or do you believe that can only be done by drobbins taking exclusive ownership of everyone's code? -- gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org mailing list