On 23:57 Sat 17 Nov , Greg KH wrote: > On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:02:19PM -0800, Alec Warner wrote: > > I'm unsure on what grounds you disapprove. People start (and abandon) > > projects often in Gentoo. Suddenly you dislike one such project and > > object to this practice? Certainly if we had to get some sort of > > Foundation consensus (for anything) nothing would happen. We can't > > even get more than 40% of foundation members to vote. > > I object if this is seen as a "Gentoo blessed" fork of a community > project that is worked on by all other major Linux distros. That is the > type of decision that can be made by the Gentoo Council, which is fine, > but it sure would be nice if it were publicly stated, instead of having > to see it on the Gentoo github site instead. > > And if that is the decision of the council, I would expect the ability > to have some type of discussion about it, wouldn't you?
Sorry to follow up late but I feel like the critical point never made it clearly into this discussion. The key misunderstanding here seems to be that initiation of a "Gentoo project" means that the council explicitly supports it, because in most distributions there is no choice available to end users at this level of detail. Instead, in Gentoo, the council-level decision typically happens when the *default* changes. Non-default or non-mandatory things are handled in a nearly anarchic, ad hoc manner, where anyone can do pretty much whatever they want as an official Gentoo project. -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Council Member / Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux <http://dberkholz.com> Analyst, RedMonk <http://redmonk.com/dberkholz/>
pgpFP4Q0Esq9W.pgp
Description: PGP signature
