[gentoo-dev] Policy regarding the inactive members
Hello folks, Looking through the Council project page, the policy regarding the inactive council members doesn't look optimal to me To ensure that the council stays active, the chosen metastructure model says that if a council member (or their appointed proxy) fails to show up for two consecutive meetings, they are marked as a slacker. So the attendance to council meetings is enough to prove that a member is active? 0_o How about the participation to the discussions which took place every day on our mailing lists or in IRC? I guess not since we need to explicitly bring each issue to the meeting so council can talk about it. So it is ok to discuss and decide on a topic without knowning all the previous discussion which took place on the mailing list. Because I really doubt that *all* council members are reading the mailing list in daily basis so they get to know everything that is going on to Gentoo. The role of the council is the following one: The elected Gentoo Council decides on global issues and policies that affect multiple projects in Gentoo I am not sure that everybody is aware of the councils' role. The only council members who look active to me are Petteri and Denis. We miss 5 more people but I am pretty sure they will be present to the next meeting hence they will be considered as active members. This is why the current policy looks wrong to me. A stricter rule should apply and clearly define when a council members is slacking and hence it has to be substituted immediately. Council is the core project of Gentoo ( at least it should be ) and it cannot afford inactive members. And because talk is cheap and we already burned our keyboards out the last few days here is my proposal: A council member is inactive when: 1) He is inactive in critical discussions ( such as the whole Phoenix discussion ) for a certain period of time 2) Fails to accomplish his role by supervising the Gentoo projects. Remember we have plenty of Gentoo projects nearly dead and there is no way for us to participate since contacting the project leaders is a no-go. Indirect question: Is the council aware of the status of all projects? Shouldn't it be since he is responsible for them? 3) Fails to attend the meetings. But this should be the last proof of their activity 4) ... If a council member is declared inactive then it will be substituted by the next non-elected member. Please, tell me exactly what does the global issues and policies that affect multiple projects in Gentoo means. What is your current role and ? It seems quite abstract to me so I am requesting you to elaborate. I feel sorry to admit that the current council failed to become a good leader for Gentoo and his inactivity demotivates both users and developers[1][2] [ etc etc ] [1] https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-822041.html [2] http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo- dev/msg_bc884b5ec61a159a6c15323b2a67965c.xml -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy regarding the inactive members
On Sun, 2010-04-11 at 16:16 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote: So the attendance to council meetings is enough to prove that a member is active? 0_o Yes, since council meetings are where the crucial voting happens. Council members that fail to show up to meetings are not generating the output we have voted them in for. Any other opinions they display (be it on mailing lists, IRC, jabber, radio programs, TV shows) which do not result in a changed vote are irrelevant. Regards, Tony V. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy regarding the inactive members
/me puts on his asbestos underwear Markos Chandras wrote: So the attendance to council meetings is enough to prove that a member is active? 0_o Yes. Anything else is just too hard to measure, imo. If you notice a council member acting w/o knowing what the heck is going on, then vote him down next election. place on the mailing list. Because I really doubt that *all* council members are reading the mailing list in daily basis so they get to know everything that is going on to Gentoo. This is impossible. Council should follow -council and debate points pushed onto their agenda via -dev. At least that's my understanding. The only council members who look active to me are Petteri and Denis. While I applaud Denis and Petteri for taking a stand on the pit that -dev is, I doubt council members should be required to participate here. They can vote on an issue without discussing their opinion first, based on their technical/social experience (which is what I voted them in for, in the first place) A council member is inactive when: 1) He is inactive in critical discussions ( such as the whole Phoenix discussion ) for a certain period of time Please, no. Or we start to get -council/-dev threads about why a certain thread here is not considered critical by half of the council when they don't reply. If you can't put a number on it, please don't make it a hard requirement. 2) Fails to accomplish his role by supervising the Gentoo projects. This isn't even in their domain. I would complain *loud* about any council member interfering with projects unless it's an inter-project issue. The council is meant for arbitration and vision, not for commanding devs. Remember we have plenty of Gentoo projects nearly dead and there is no way for us to participate since contacting the project leaders is a no-go. Huh? That's what I did with php. Chtekk was most helpful, and because he's no longer active (wish him all the best!), nobody stopped me from updating the projects pages to reflect that (after speaking to the team, of course!) Rather than relying on the council for whatever leadership you want, please just DO something that scratches YOUR itch. I'm aware our current technical/social infrastructure is not up to par on handling large scale contributions by hundreds of users/non-devs. I realize there's this impression that every time you have an idea there's a mob of people stoning your idea to death. I have however observed that the more mature (read: the more implemented code) your idea is, the smaller the stones. And if your idea is good enough, others might use their stones for building instead of mud-slinging. Just my 2cent. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy regarding the inactive members
On 2010.04.11 14:16, Markos Chandras wrote: Hello folks, Looking through the Council project page, the policy regarding the inactive council members doesn't look optimal to me To ensure that the council stays active, the chosen metastructure model says that if a council member (or their appointed proxy) fails to show up for two consecutive meetings, they are marked as a slacker. [snip] Markos, Thats from GLEP39. The council has already ruled that they cannot change GLEP39 without a general vote of all Gentoo devs. This suggests you need to present your proposals as an amendment to GLEP39 and that all devs need to vote on it. Others have already pointed out a few issues with your proposal, so I'll stop there. -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees pgpHPUMoxa32x.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy regarding the inactive members
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 04:04:57PM +0200, Matti Bickel wrote: /me puts on his asbestos underwear Markos Chandras wrote: So the attendance to council meetings is enough to prove that a member is active? 0_o Yes. Anything else is just too hard to measure, imo. If you notice a council member acting w/o knowing what the heck is going on, then vote him down next election. place on the mailing list. Because I really doubt that *all* council members are reading the mailing list in daily basis so they get to know everything that is going on to Gentoo. This is impossible. Council should follow -council and debate points pushed onto their agenda via -dev. At least that's my understanding. But isn't it the councils purpose to lead gentoo? I agree it's damn hard to measure. A thing that could be done is to appoint one person to speak on behalf of the council and to follow -dev. The entire Python-3 stabilization could have used a figure to say that it was to be stabilized or not and state why and what should (and would) be done to prevent the same situation in the future. Imo Gentoo sorely needs a leader. Someone to bring all of these various bodies of gentoo to work together. 2) Fails to accomplish his role by supervising the Gentoo projects. This isn't even in their domain. I would complain *loud* about any council member interfering with projects unless it's an inter-project issue. The council is meant for arbitration and vision, not for commanding devs. Well, the way I understand it, the council is elected to lead Gentoo. By leading they have to either delegate to someone to supervise Gentoo projects or do it themselves. It isn't supervision in a Why is developer X not doing anything but rather as This project hasn't moved forward for X months, let's get in touch and hear what's going on and what can be done about and whether or not anything should be done. Gentoo consists of the projects it works on (and has worked on), leading Gentoo must also mean leading the projects. Rather than relying on the council for whatever leadership you want, please just DO something that scratches YOUR itch. I'm aware our current technical/social infrastructure is not up to par on handling large scale contributions by hundreds of users/non-devs. I realize there's this impression that every time you have an idea there's a mob of people stoning your idea to death. I have however observed that the more mature (read: the more implemented code) your idea is, the smaller the stones. And if your idea is good enough, others might use their stones for building instead of mud-slinging. But if the council is elected to lead Gentoo, then they are the ones to look at when there is a seeming lack of leadership. I do agree that doing something yourself will always be the first step, but there is no way every developer can keep track of everything that's going on. It seems to me that the need for Gentoo at the moment is, someone who can keep track of the ongoings of Gentoo and make the necessary decisions to further this distribution. A council is a very good idea, but it is a slowly moving process and there needs to be an intermediate person that can do the day to day decisions, and this person would of course take the most important issues (along with anything the individual developers think should be taken care of) to the council for the council to vote on. I utterly fail to see why there should be any rock throwing. It should not be hard to voice your concerns about an idea without coming off as hostile. Rather than seeing a problem with the idea, one should look for solutions. And on that note I fail to see why flaming occurs, this is a workplace and you don't get into arguments (heated debates yes but not arguments) with your other employers, do you? And even if it is a volountary workplace and it's on the internet, the same courtesy should be shown. I know all of you already know this, but if there's something you think might not be understood in the manner you intend in real life, then it definately won't be understood in the manner you intend on the internet. And there's something good about that this is on the internet. If you feel like you're starting to get agitated, take a breather, no one will know any better, other than (hopefully) your responce will be that much more relaxed. As an endnote I should say that I know you're all doing your best here, so keep it up! -- Zeerak Waseem pgpkCTR8LZgNi.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy regarding the inactive members
Zeerak Mustafa Waseem wrote: But isn't it the councils purpose to lead gentoo? It's my understanding that council gets elected to lead gentoo as a whole. But in the end the one doing the work gets to decide what's going on (as long as it's intra-project; the only thing i remember where council got to vote on a project outcome is PMS/EAPI) Don't get me wrong: several times i hoped for somebody with authority to magically end discussions on an issue, handing out the right direction and be done with it (you already mentioned python-3). But in a consensus community like gentoo we will instantly have discussions about our definition of right direction. Only a select few still have that authority required to end a sub-thread with their right direction. And this is mostly because they post hard facts you are buying because they've done so for years and otherwise kept their mouth shut. But i disgress.. By leading they have to either delegate to someone to supervise Gentoo projects or do it themselves. No. It just doesn't work that way. GLEP39 says projects may have a leader, who will hopefully be responsible to the projects members. That's the person you want to turn to. Older projects may still have a operation lead and a strategic lead. In that case, you want the strategic lead :) The whole wording and history of the GLEP gives projects most of the power. They can't be blocked by the community, they can conflict, they can go defunct at any time. All these are explicitly spelled out in the GLEP. I do agree that doing something yourself will always be the first step, but there is no way every developer can keep track of everything that's going on. They are not required to. I'm not required to know of the wiki project or the huge issue that python3 going stable seems to be. My responsibility as a dev is to keep up with things I work on, like EAPI changes. If I *want* others to notice, I'll contact council (if I need a decision) or PR (if I have an announcement). You are proposing a centralized solution. This hasn't worked since Daniel left and I personally think gentoo's too large to successfully try it again. I utterly fail to see why there should be any rock throwing. Me too. But it happens. Despite a dozen folks calling for calm again and again. I don't want to offer explanations for it, this mail has gotten long enough as it is ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy regarding the inactive members
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11-04-2010 13:16, Markos Chandras wrote: Hello folks, Looking through the Council project page, the policy regarding the inactive council members doesn't look optimal to me As others have already explained, this is from GLEP39 and it has an historic background. The council after some discussion wasn't able to agree they could change it and as I've said before, I'm one of those that believes this cannot be changed by the council or by a simple proposal from any dev. Any change to this policy in my opinion requires a global vote by the dev community. The role of the council is the following one: The elected Gentoo Council decides on global issues and policies that affect multiple projects in Gentoo I am not sure that everybody is aware of the councils' role. The only council members who look active to me are Petteri and Denis. We miss 5 more people but I am pretty sure they will be present to the next meeting hence they will be considered as active members. This is why the current policy looks wrong to me. What you and others don't seem aware is that not everyone agrees with this interpretation or with your view about what the council is or should be. I feel sorry to admit that the current council failed to become a good leader for Gentoo and his inactivity demotivates both users and developers[1][2] [ etc etc ] I disagree with you, but more importantly I disagree with the way you're bringing this up. Yes, you can disagree with the current council and you may not feel represented by it. Furthermore, you're free to express your divergent opinion. But if you want to replace the council. you'll have to wait for the next election where you'll have to convince developers to vote in a different way and if you feel so strongly about the council work you may even want to stand for the election. - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJLwiBiAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEP25QP/0LiEyQ6AgJ+FVMSyajKsOxs Fz1Gd2AgU6IGspNLcuoBvVaItE0Eu883r3Lp8bqmVoYI4U5zdEH+5+2L1alSCjXa RHpgVakmEdgR+ViR/nN1fIv1vG+8TV2lFmaQiJHwatx9qT1MbKAr5ABAWryXK1mT w5eW33spopUzEbBJzLgzeHy1wKuSwyXyvaA+mIuBWiwY5kulibBd/wY02FUnkA77 kaKBx7aUYeVplpzUWBFesRFNEJ3lQwAZtWua6dxF/YuK952CfNHh32D2YxP7kq8n uq2/vOhRlQGYfn8+25ARaXhOHhE12MVt1oZAHjp5qnlVBaSlXztufVCOFMAaSjFR aLLdelLk+1jch09QBu3i2Ws3m5yh7MadnNLM0atP+Y+PGdT9VK64TQxOckFH0njE reKSGdewOYDQH5ALS//XViBzpRL4qCWm0FRQN/K6iyZ6f4z4cWZeQhFxsdbLYU9I Uc93ozsGsLD41mj/c0mggdm0y1HxDVQbLojd5umDH0UMV5e4kSXJ1TJMwe4FPVsd bxo7piu7tTd7/pJmoCgd6fDI7w4Ys4MLxmbtdFce8Rql9A9pF8Ir9PozvVAVrWJS 8PuXxFcqSX3l0edOtCYDOALrZ8diskw6ruX3eLL6puNyL7bnDjOTwuT8xIjWcDE4 P9mMOKgsQgUATuyLVANY =45cX -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy regarding the inactive members
Le 11/04/2010 15:16, Markos Chandras a écrit : How about the participation to the discussions which took place every day on our mailing lists or in IRC? I, for one, am actually glad that the council (as such) isn't involved in every troll fest we have on -dev, and I hope we keep it that way. I guess not since we need to explicitly bring each issue to the meeting so council can talk about it. That's the whole point of the council (as I understand it): they only come in when there are issues that we (non-council devs) can't solve on our own. Why bother them with stuff that doesn't really concern them? Cheers, Rémi
