Roy Bamford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sun, 27 Aug 2006 12:28:04 +0100:
> I think the problem(s) stem from the way Gentoo is organised now. I'm > sure you will shoot me down if I'm wrong. In summary. Gentoo is a loose > knit group of packages with individuals belonging to one or more of the > herds that maintain them. The herd/team leads are supposed to 'get > along' but on occasions, this doesn't happen. Above them is the > council. > > If that's wrong, stop reading here. There are (as usual) details, but from my read, that's pretty close. > Lets define Management - its a process of planning, communicating the > plan, getting buy in from the team(s) who will execute the plan, > gathering feedback on progress and replanning. It looks cyclic but its > really a set of concurrent activities. Google PRINCE2 for the details. > > At the top level, the council, in its present form does not manage > Gentoo. It can't, it's pretty much disempowered as a management > organisation due to the rules for its agenda setting. An acutely accurate observation, AFAICT. > If the council are to undertake the management of Gentoo, its terms of > reference need to be drastically altered to allow them to undertake the > management process defined above. > In short, Gentoo has a top level power vacuum, allowing what amounts to > the 'power struggle 'we see today. This is the best reading of the situation I've seen, IMO. Good work! Whether changing the rules to allow the council to manage appropriately is politically doable or not remains an open question, and I'm not even sure I'd back it myself if it is possible, but that's the best description of where we are at that I've seen, which means we've gone along way toward accomplishing the first step in any good debate, a proper definition of the issue. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
