On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Vladimir Zhbanov <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 11:03:53PM +0200, Markus Hitter ([email protected]) > [via [email protected]] wrote: >> Am 14.09.2015 um 21:10 schrieb Vladimir Zhbanov: >> >> This is work in progress. LP admins are apparently mortal, too, because >> >> > none of them shows a sign of life. >> > Markus, please, stop this :) >> >> Why whould I? I'm active not only on this list, I'm also on IRC and >> write people personally. >> >> I wrote Peter TB Brett, the person listed as "owner" of the gEDA >> Launchpad team. I had to grab his email address from Git, because he >> decided to hide it on LP. I asked on IRC about the LP team. He decided >> to not answer. Or he didn't recognize it on any of the channels. From my >> perspective he's inactive, gone, disappeared, choose your favourite term. > > Look, AFAIR, Al Davis didn't work on gnucap for two or three years. He > just had some private difficulties. Now he is again the leader of > Gnucap development. OTOH, you was inactive in the geda community at > least the last year. Another story is my participation in the > development. Sometimes I have so much load, that I cannot just do > anything for geda for weeks (while I'm still eager to). > > I believe, there is no man who can be on-line permanently, every day and > every night. One of the solution I see is election of a leader who will > be responsible (yes, responsible, as a department director) for the > project. The leadership would give him/her the real power to promote > his/her strategy (approved by devs due to election) and the results of > his/her leadership would affect the next election. > >> >> > Admins are apparently mortals (their list you can find at >> > https://launchpad.net/~geda-admins/+members#active), and they cannot >> > read all this flow of posts as quickly as you write them. >> >> This hide and seek game most of the older admins orchestrate has to >> stop. With this attitude they managed to grind gEDA development to an >> almost halt. None of them is forced to put work in, but if they decide >> to stay away it's most important they don't take the keys with them. >> Easiest ways to ensure this: hand out a lot of keys or remove the door >> lock entirely. > > I disagree here. The fact that you try to not notice their work doesn't > mean they're not working. Look through the repos, presentations, don't > you see current admin's work? And after all, whom should developers give > the keys? And why? (See below) > >> >> > You know, for sure, the name of the admin responsible for pcb :) >> >> The idea that some single person is "responsible" for community work is >> a wrong idea. Every single person of a community is. Some of these >> community persons keep the place nice, comfortable and, most important >> of all, open. > That's your vision. Any state is a 'community', however only > president/chancellor decides what's the way to go. > > The hell is an example of democracy amongst its 'member's. The paradise > is always hierarchy. > >> >> > Probably, DJ could help you, too. >> >> I asked DJ and he says he has no business with Launchpad. >> >> > Therefore, Bert and Marcus, please just tell me what you want to do, >> > I've just not read the discussion yet. For now, I've configured >> > blueprints for pcb to be managed by launchpad. >> >> Very nice :-) One person alive :-) Thank you. >> >> Off the top of my head there are two more things: >> >> - There's a backlog of 5 people waiting for approval: >> >> https://launchpad.net/~geda-admins/+members >> >> Neither approving nor declining them for several years(!) is certainly >> not the way to grow and strengthen a community. >> >> - One of them is Eugene Mikhantiev. A week ago I asked Eugene wether he >> wants to move his PPA to the gEDA Administrators team to catch several >> birds with one stone: >> >> - gEDA would have an official PPA, then, always delivering the latest >> builds. Excellent for the "Downloads" web page. >> >> - gEDA would have an active admin on Launchpad. OK, counting your >> appearance, he'd be the second active LP admin, then. >> >> - We had another developer and collaborator. >> >> Believe it or not, he agreed! You see? It's sometimes as simple as >> writing people a nice email to bring them in. I used his PPA and it >> works flawlessly, excellent contribution! >> > > OK, I can tell you my opinion on this. > Two of the waiting of approval people are Bob and Carlos, they are the > developers, who you'd call 'inactive'. That's why (I think) nobody > decides (at least, I wouldn't) if there is any sense to add them now. > One of them (Marco), is a translator. Why should he manage the project? > He has appeared not long ago, I'd wait for his contribution first. > I don't know who is David McAllister. Never seen him here or in any gEDA > context. He is the fourth. The reason for waiting can be the same. And, > eventually, Eugene, whom you want to see as an admin. I don't see any > his merits but making PPA's for Ubuntu. Hey, there are many people who > makes packages for other distributions/OS's. And what? > > BTW, looking through the list of people wanted to be gEDA developers I > see no one I remember having any contribution made in our repos or on > LP. > > And, AFAICS, the gEDA admin list is the superior list over the gEDA > developer list. And I think it is very true that only developers, > having made significant contributions and knowing all this kitchen from > the inside, decide whom to approve to be a new developer. > > OTOH, I see your point. We have no mechanism to get new admins without > 'old' ones, who may become inactive some day. (I've seen this before, > and now I see where it has been led :( That's why I'm afraid of this new > tendency in the list). > > So, my suggestion is as follows: > > Let's play in the 'real democracy', that is > * let's ask the current admins if they're ready/consider this to be > good to changing the current policy and add some other devs/users as > admins of the admins' list > * let's do it in the dev list which all devs and admins have been > subscribed on (At least you, DJ, Bert, Evan, me could participate in > the voting) > * If nobody of the admin list admins answers, we could consider them > to be inactive > * The result can be defined just as majority vote. > * Any time there is a possibility to do a fork (I hate to say this!)
I like this plan. Thank you for including me. If adopted we should document it on the website next to the code of conduct. > Let me be honest. I wouldn't do any such decisions without of the > developers/admins we already have, whose work I very appreciate, so I CC > this to the dev list. Let's try... > > And my two questions for all devs are: > * Please answer if you are ready to change the current > policy and add some other devs/users as admins to the admins of the > gEDA administrator list? > * What are criteria for the people who might be admins of the gEDA > administrator list? Are we waiting for a given number of them to respond or a particular amount of time? I mean at some point we have to accept Peter TB Brett as the only voter right? > I hope you'll be not indifferent. > > Cheers, > Vladimir > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~geda-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~geda-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp -- Home http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/ Work http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/ -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~geda-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~geda-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
