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. -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
