On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 07:34 -0600, Dale wrote: > Mick wrote: > > On Saturday 12 January 2008, Jil Larner wrote: > > > >> Well, it's like if I am opening my eyes. I never looked at what the > >> foundation was supposed to do. For a couple of years I've been using > >> gentoo, I never get any political announcement, maybe because I didn't > >> look at the right place, or maybe there was no. I mean that except the > >> Gentoo's Philosophy and the Gentoo's Social Contract, I didn't see > >> politic, for my eyes were probably closed. > >> It doesn't mean I didn't enjoyed gentoo, its power, its flexibility, its > >> community. But I certainly missed something. There are so many ways to > >> communicate (lists, IRC, boards, wikis, project pages, etc.) that I must > >> admit I'm sometime lost. > >> > >> Today, I learn we're in trouble. Good. What trouble ? What's happening ? > >> Why through the words of Daniel Robbins, I feel some fear ? I feel he > >> foresees a dead end and offers an opportunity to change before it is too > >> late. Once more, to quote Matrix, "the problem is choice". In Free > >> Software, there are often choices where the community can get involved > >> in and it makes our strength. The problem is, and is not, legal papers. > >> Because, IMO, legal papers are the visible part of an Iceberg. Could > >> someone tell me what *really* is the crisis ? If people did not do what > >> they were supposed to do : what should they have done ? > >> > >> Thanks. > >> > > > > I am equally agnostic of Gentoo management politics, albeit grateful that > > people volunteer their time and effort to keep it going. From the little > > exposure that I have had to it all it seems to me that Alan's views ring > > depressingly true. I read Daniel's blog and cannot disagree with what he > > suggests - it makes common sense that users views and desires should > > determine Gentoo's direction, but I have not read between the lines to see > > how might his proposals lead to directions that I would not readily agree > > with. See this excerpt of his below from OSNews.com in 2002: > > > > "I very much want to find a way to turn the Gentoo Linux project into a > > profitable enterprise. My main motivation in wanting to do this is so I can > > stop living from paycheck to paycheck and focus my professional efforts > > exclusively on Gentoo Linux development. Many of our developers would like > > to > > do the same thing" > > > > (I am not critising this statement of his; after all I would very much like > > to > > find myself a sustainable way of being able to do what I like - without > > having to spend the biggest part of my day in my current job.) > > > > Giving a free hand to any single person is not safe in my humble view, > > especially if that person is employed by Microsoft - I will find hard to > > rest > > assured that there will be no conflict of interest. On the other hand it > > seems that Gentoo desperately needs *mature* leadership, which can fulfill > > some rather significant responsibilities. From what I read the current > > Gentoo administration and management setup does not seem to be able to > > behave > > with the professionalism required to achieve that. This makes me anxious > > for > > the future of Gentoo. > > > > Just my 2c's. > > > > I have been using Gentoo for about 4 or 5 years now. I to think Gentoo > has well, lost its way. It seems like a bunch of teenagers is running > it sometimes. They decide something then go back a few steps when they > don't like the results. Proctors come to mind on that. Users seems to > be the last thing on the higher ups mind. That is not good. > > I love my Gentoo but I would like to see someone step up and get some > things done and some decisions made, even those we may never know about. > > I just don't want to see Gentoo fall into the abyss. > > Dale > > :-) :-)
Although he works for Microsoft, Daniel is the one who created this project. He has been a developer of several operating systems, including Freebsd. I would, as a user, like for him to come back to the project, if it means gentoo going back to the old way. On the other hand, his major decisions with regard to gentoo should be voted on by the developer/user community. I don't want gentoo to become another SuSE. I don't want him to insidiously harm gentoo with the immunity of acting president. Everything should be done in the open. There should be some sort of constitution which protects gentoo from losing certain principles or ethics. One of which is that it will always be free of charge; at least from the gentoo foundation. He has to be, as acting president, bound to a code of ethics or rules decided by the community. It is clear that he cares for this project. He wants to come back but, is he willing to come back as a leader under our conditions? -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
