Gentoo Forums :: View topic - The Rules (or Governance Model) Gentoo Operates Under

The Rules (or Governance Model) Gentoo Operates Under

View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Gentoo Forums Forum Index

Gentoo Chat

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

khayyam
Watchman

Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2015 8:18 pm Post subject: The Rules (or Governance Model) Gentoo Operates Under

Split from the ffmpeg/libav default in Gentoo topic to help keep it mostly about the poll. — JRG

Naib wrote:

but this is more like a MORI Poll then a GeneralElection, especially as Gentoo isn't a demogracy. As I said earlier its more like a Show Election

Naib ... except that graphia (description) and kratos (power) have two distinct meanings, so 'gentoo being a demos-graphia' wouldn't say anything about its political makeup. The greek demokratia was actually operated by 'lots' rather then 'polls', so we're actually abusing the term by calling a fetish for representation 'democracy'. Anyhow, as I'm on the subject ... there are basically three forms of govern{ment,ance}, monarchy (the one), oligarchy (the few), and democracy (the many) ... obviously there are various gradations, and some blurring at the edges, but that's what forms of arkos are basically on offer ;)

As you mention it, in that same 'ffmpeg vs libav choice of default' thread Ben de Groot states that "gentoo is not a democracy", and since we no longer have a monarch that must make us an oligarchy ;)

Oh & BTW, I used that same term in another recent poll, and linked to the same wikipedia page ... though that was more due to the 'decision' coming too quickly, and without any real discussion, also the poll had a somewhat closed set of options. In terms of the above I don't see it quite the same way, and probably you don't in practice, as my guess is you probably contributed to the poll having not called for a boycott and/or stated that you abstain due to an objection to such a charade.

best ... khay

Last edited by khayyam on Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:52 am; edited 1 time in total

krinn
Watchman

Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:45 am Post subject:

khayyam wrote:

The greek demokratia was actually operated by 'lots' rather then 'polls', so we're actually abusing the term by calling a fetish for representation 'democracy'.

Khayyam, the demo doesn't mean "a lot" but "people".

I don't have real number or stats, but in a "suppose" vote : 48% vote "M. X", 52% vote "M. Y", 30% didn't vote, if you takes number no matter how it is, the "M. Y" wins, but if you takes the real number : 48+52 = 100% of voter, 30% are not the non voting population in real, but 30% non voter out the 100% of known voter (people who declares themselves interest in voting).
It would be stupid to assume 100% of declare voters mean 100% of population, as many people are not even registered as voters.

What it mean is that if : 10 millions are voters out of 60 millions, only 70% of the 10 millions vote (30% are non voter), so 52% votes for "M. Y" mean 52% of the 70% of 10 millions only. (70% of 10 millions mean 7 millions, and 52% of the 7 millions people that vote is 3.64 millions vote "M. Y")
Now if you look at what 3.64 millions voters who said "M. Y" represent in the population of 60 millions people: it is 6,06%
6.06% or 3.64 millions people out of 60 millions is a real tiny number of people
If you look at "not for M. Y" people (not voter but people, so just 60m - 3.64m) that's 56.36 millions (or 100-6.06=93.94%) people who didn't vote for M. Y, but it will still mean your country have now M. Y as President.
So a very small number of people that is use to justify a President election ; but does it shock you?
To translate this into gentoo world: people are gentoo users, voters are forum users (as any forum user have the right to vote on the poll, and no, i have never heard of someone that was force to vote in our forum poll because some old Italian were next to him with a gun), and results are based on express vote of voters only (so out of people, only forum registered users are voters, and non voters are all registered forum users that didn't vote in the poll)

Seeing a gentoo dev polling gentoo users in forum, i see it as a "call for people voice", a typical democratic action.
The "it is still a very very small demographic representation and it should not be used as justification todo anything" from Naib is not relevant to the validity of the result, just like it is not for a President.
Nor i see it as an Show Election, because when i cast my vote, i clearly see my choice was increase by my vote, it's not like we have a forum poll without query and seeing results pre-made (generally they don't even take care to simulate any reality and just show a 100% result, dictators like their show election results are awesome)

It is easy to tell Gentoo is not a democracy without telling what Gentoo is then...
For me, i always feel Gentoo is a democracy, because we could cast our wishes and let our voices heard thru bugzilla or the forum, devs aren't elect, but the Gentoo representatives are (hi NeddySeagoon!).
Now that i justify why i think Gentoo is a democracy, i'm waiting Ben de Groot explains why it is not, what it is then, and justify it.
Because if in his world, Gentoo is rules by devs with an iron fist, it is "his" vision of Gentoo and that the presume devs oligarchy (powered by the "who made the code..." mantra) is a myth all devs like to teach to new devs to comfy them they are messiah on earth ruling sheep.
devs are accountable to the Gentoo project itself (and the Gentoo project isn't made of devs, but devs and users), or do anyone think gentoo dev M. Z could delete the tree and no one would complain about that because hey, "he made the code to delete the tree and you didn't"...

khayyam
Watchman

Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:09 am Post subject:

krinn wrote:

khayyam wrote:

The greek demokratia was actually operated by 'lots' rather then 'polls', so we're actually abusing the term by calling a fetish for representation 'democracy'.

Khayyam, the demo doesn't mean "a lot" but "people".

krinn ... yes, demos means people, but the 'lot' in the above is the kind of 'lot' we mean when we say "drawing lots" (so, a decision made via the selection of names from a hat, for instance). In the "three forms of governance" provided above, democracy, "the many", does not equate to a majority ... its not a "numbers game" but a recognition that every portion of the demos has a defacto right to govern. So, an expression of universal suffrage.

krinn wrote:

[...] So a very small number of people that is use to justify a President election ; but does it shock you?

Yes and no ... yes, because I don't regard election as expressing the nature of demokratia, and so its shocking that we fetishise the procedure and think that representation is all there is to it, and no, because where humans are concerned nothing shocks me ;)

krinn wrote:

Seeing a gentoo dev polling gentoo users in forum, i see it as a "call for people voice", a typical democratic action. The "it is still a very very small demographic representation and it should not be used as justification todo anything" from Naib is not relevant to the validity of the result, just like it is not for a President.

Agreed, its just an attempt to get some idea of what peoples views on the matter are ... its not a 'poll' in the sense that policy is being decided via the casting of votes. Ultimately the usefulness of such a poll depends on what effect it has ... which I guess is the gist of Naib's concerns.

krinn wrote:

Nor i see it as an Show Election, because when i cast my vote, i clearly see my choice was increase by my vote, it's not like we have a forum poll without query and seeing results pre-made (generally they don't even take care to simulate any reality and just show a 100% result, dictators like their show election results are awesome)

To play devil's advocate: its also possible that by consultation the democratic deficit has been overcome, so the "show" enacted and the problem of a deficit swept aside. That's the principle reason for a "show election", its totally irrelevant to the dictators "100% result" but serves some other purpose. So, again, it really depends on the outcome, or how the consolation plays out in terms of actual policy, how opinion is shaped by it, etc.

krinn wrote:

It is easy to tell Gentoo is not a democracy without telling what Gentoo is then...

Well, I wouldn't take the quote from Ben too seriously, its really just a reflection of how muddled peoples views on this subject are. Gentoo is a democracy ... though like all democracies it struggles with oligarchic elements, and the fact that 'agreement' is never a simple proposition (ie, can be settled via a "vote"). I've argued elsewhere that gentoo's governance structure is lacking in many ways, and that because of this developers are given a mandate to operate as a law unto themselves (though that in itself isn't a simple proposition as they don't necessarily operate as one).

krinn wrote:

Now that i justify why i think Gentoo is a democracy, i'm waiting Ben de Groot explains why it is not, what it is then, and justify it.

Again, I think that was said without really thinking about what the term really means ... if gentoo developers think that the project could function without the co-operation, and agreement, of the community then they are completely mistaken ... without all the work done by non-developers (ie, reporting bugs, supporting users, etc) gentoo wouldn't exist, period. The fact that this idea isn't more explicitly expressed, or that this even needs stated, does offer a worrying pause. Developers are not the sum total of persons "doing the work", they need us as much as we them (in fact, they are no different from us).

krinn wrote:

[...] (powered by the "who made the code..." mantra) is a myth all devs like to teach to new devs to comfy them they are messiah on earth ruling sheep.

Yeah, that particular argument is something I've heard voiced on quite a number of occasions, its completely bogus.

best ... khay

steveL
Watchman

Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 9:04 am Post subject:

krinn wrote:

[...] (powered by the "who made the code..." mantra) is a myth all devs like to teach to new devs to comfy them they are messiah on earth ruling sheep.

khayyam wrote:

Yeah, that particular argument is something I've heard voiced on quite a number of occasions, its completely bogus.

Agreed. For a start, they didn't make the code: upstream did, and upstreams can be as nutty as anyone, which is why users (of whatever software you care to like) get together and make a distro.

The idea being that we share collective knowledge, typically encoded in scripts, which IT undergrads think is somehow bad because they're crap at shell.

Don't get me wrong: Gentoo has some very talented and competent people. But they don't tend to be the ones pushing for fashionable new projects, to try and curry favour with upstreams and establish a "reputation". Usually they've seen and heard it all before.

Unfortunately it's hampered by crappy design decisions at the outset, and young male pride.

khayyam
Watchman

Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 10:55 am Post subject:

steveL wrote:

krinn wrote:

[...] (powered by the "who made the code..." mantra) is a myth all devs like to teach to new devs to comfy them they are messiah on earth ruling sheep.

khayyam wrote:

Yeah, that particular argument is something I've heard voiced on quite a number of occasions, its completely bogus.

Agreed. For a start, they didn't make the code: upstream did, and upstreams can be as nutty as anyone, which is why users (of whatever software you care to like) get together and make a distro.

steve ... well, its normally heard when someone voices an opinion contrary to the one the developer holds, they receive a "reality check" ... which basically amounts to their opinion on the matter being "meaningless", as its only "code" that counts as a meaningful contribution. Don't like it? ... "you'll just have to adapt". If "the code" is then forthcoming (ie, your patch for separate /usr) then that too can be similarly ignored ... which makes the whole argument something of a paradox.

best ... khay

Last edited by khayyam on Fri Feb 13, 2015 11:00 am; edited 1 time in total

steveL
Watchman

Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 10:58 am Post subject:

khayyam wrote:

... which makes the whole argument something of a paradox.

I prefer the term "horse-shit." ;)

Finding the bug is usually most of fixing the bug; and it is the users who do the QA, especially in Gentoo, but everywhere else in FLOSS too.

khayyam
Watchman

Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 11:09 am Post subject:

steveL wrote:

khayyam wrote:

... which makes the whole argument something of a paradox.

I prefer the term "horse-shit." ;)

steve ... we'll split the difference and call it "paradung" or the "excretor excuse" ;)

best ... khay

yngwin
Retired Dev

Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4572
Location: Suzhou, China

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 11:34 am Post subject:

krinn wrote:

Now that i justify why i think Gentoo is a democracy, i'm waiting Ben de Groot explains why it is not, what it is then, and justify it.

Gentoo, just like most open source projects, is mostly a meritocracy. People who do the work get to make the decisions. (See GLEP 39.) There are some democratic elements (such as developers electing the Council, and majority vote of Council members in Council decisions), and some decidedly non-democratic ones (members of important projects such as infra, QA, and ComRel are not elected).

And while the contributions from community members are important, they do not have a vote in elections for the Council, nor is there any obligation to do polls for any decision the developers may want to make. As such, the users have no "rule" as commonly understood in the term democracy. The developers can pretty much do what they want, within certain limits (GLEP39, CoC). And while I would encourage developers to take into account the wants and needs of users, they have no obligation to do so.

I'm not saying Gentoo's organizational structure is how I would like it to be. I'm just trying to describe how it is.

Also, in this thread I see certain people making accusatory statements that either are based on a lack of understanding, or a wilful misrepresentation of the facts. It would be helpful if users would not jump to conclusions, and instead try to maintain an open dialogue with the developers. We all love this distro and want to see the best for it.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF

ff11
l33t
l33t

Joined: 10 Mar 2014
Posts: 664

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:53 pm Post subject:

yngwin wrote:

krinn wrote:

Now that i justify why i think Gentoo is a democracy, i'm waiting Ben de Groot explains why it is not, what it is then, and justify it.

I'm curious, can you tell us your viewpoint? For me, so far, has been quite logical the statements. And your comment just gave it more strength, in my view. I would be grateful if you could clarify the facts from your viewpoint.

Naib
Watchman

Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6065
Location: Removed by Neddy

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 1:12 pm Post subject:

yngwin wrote:

krinn wrote:

Now that i justify why i think Gentoo is a democracy, i'm waiting Ben de Groot explains why it is not, what it is then, and justify it.

and yet this (and the ml posts) do nothing to address the problem...
"oh the locals are getting restless, change their focus...". Has the ivory tower of gentoo developers again risen that the results of their actions or inactions outside of their innerCircle is irrelevant?

This is a show Election not because it provides a front to the peasants that they matter... its a showElection because it should not have even been asked! libAV is broken, it should not have been unmasked, it should not have been set as "the default"
What the LibAV developers are doing is childish and the action and inaction of the gentoo developer are enablers to provide justification for it to carry on.
LibAV is broken not only in what they have done, something that in the Civilized world is known as IdentityTheft (and is a criminal offence) and in the animal world as being a parasite but in what they provide does not work with what is in the tree...

If they were API & ABI compatible BUT could not be installed side by side ... virtuals
If they were API & ABI compatible and could live side by side BUT same namespace ... eselect ( NVDIA, AMD, Intel, MESA don't seem to act like children.)

what exactly are you doing to fix this or are you detached from reality that you don't see a problem? Have you, Gentoo developers pushed back on FFMPEG and LIBAV to correct their broken install ? if you want the magical internet points associated with siding with libAV, are you patching all the programs in the tree that are now broken! what exactly have you done except let this slide downto the users, users that gentoo dev's don't seem to care about

The only reason a broken concept is permitted to perpetuate is either political,monetary or inertia.
_________________

Quote:

Removed by Chiitoo

Last edited by Naib on Fri Feb 13, 2015 1:21 pm; edited 1 time in total

khayyam
Watchman

Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 1:17 pm Post subject:

yngwin wrote:

krinn wrote:

Now that i justify why i think Gentoo is a democracy, i'm waiting Ben de Groot explains why it is not, what it is then, and justify it.

Gentoo, just like most open source projects, is mostly a meritocracy. People who do the work get to make the decisions. (See GLEP 39.)

yngwin ... but this notion of a 'meritocracy' is somewhat vague if viewed from the basic categories provided by the political sciences. Merit is more a measure of competency, it doesn't offer very much in the way of explaining the process of decision making, or kratos (power), as whatever the level of merit (ie, having "created gentoo" or what-have-you) the right to "make decisions" isn't automatically bestowed. If you want to examine, or model, power then you have to study how that power operates, who is included/excluded, who is granted the right to make decisions, etc, etc ... the entire spectrum of inputs into the system, and I don't see the idea of a meritocracy as offering much in the way of explanatory power in that regard.

yngwin wrote:

There are some democratic elements (such as developers electing the Council, and majority vote of Council members in Council decisions), and some decidedly non-democratic ones (members of important projects such as infra, QA, and ComRel are not elected).

I don't necessarily see the process of election as being indicative of, or equatable to, democracy ... democracy is more a question of how power is distributed, and the inclusion/exclusion of the parties involved.

best ... khay

yngwin
Retired Dev

Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4572
Location: Suzhou, China

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 3:48 pm Post subject:

Naib wrote:

The fact that several developers are actively discussing this on these forums, as well as helping users here (and on the bug tracker, and on IRC) who run into trouble, should tell you otherwise.

Naib wrote:

libAV is broken, it should not have been unmasked,

LibAV is not broken. Only newer versions were masked, exactly because a number of applications were broken with those newer versions. These bugs have now been solved.

Naib wrote:

it should not have been set as "the default"

It has been the default for years. It was just made more explicit recently. And the question has come up whether we should change that default (and the answer from most people is "yes").

Naib wrote:

What the LibAV developers are doing is childish and the action and inaction of the gentoo developer are enablers to provide justification for it to carry on.
LibAV is broken not only in what they have done, something that in the Civilized world is known as IdentityTheft (and is a criminal offence) and in the animal world as being a parasite but in what they provide does not work with what is in the tree...

The situation is more complex than that. I don't really want to go into the upstream politics, but we can all agree that it is messy and unfortunate.

I am personally not on either side, as I see good and bad on both sides. But I really don't think that your combative word choice is helpful. If you want Gentoo developers to listen to the community and engage in open dialogue about how to best handle things, you really need to adopt a more cooperative and open manner. What I see here, and in various other posts in this thread and others, is really discouraging.

Anyway, initially the libav fork was more active and doing more fixes, which is why many distros including Gentoo chose to go with libav as default implementation (though we have always supported both). In the meantime FFmpeg has adopted the policy of daily merging back the changes made by libav, so the improvements made there are also available to ffmpeg users.

Naib wrote:

what exactly are you doing to fix this or are you detached from reality that you don't see a problem? Have you, Gentoo developers pushed back on FFMPEG and LIBAV to correct their broken install ?

Most certainly we have brought up this issues with both upstreams. So far to no avail.

Naib wrote:

if you want the magical internet points associated with siding with libAV,

Again, stop these useless insinuations. As Gentoo developer community we are not siding with anyone. We simply made a choice of default, based on the facts we had at the time, and from an end-user point of view. This was several years ago, mind you. We are now considering changing that default.

Naib wrote:

are you patching all the programs in the tree that are now broken! what exactly have you done except let this slide downto the users, users that gentoo dev's don't seem to care about.

You are wrong. We certainly do care, which is also why some of us come to these forums to discuss it. And yes, if you cared to look at the work that was done, as can be witnessed on our bug tracker, you would see that we have tried to resolve these issues, either by patching packages, or working with upstreams to get better support, or by making the dependencies more explicit.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF

yngwin
Retired Dev

Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4572
Location: Suzhou, China

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 3:53 pm Post subject:

khayyam wrote:

yngwin wrote:

Gentoo, just like most open source projects, is mostly a meritocracy. People who do the work get to make the decisions. (See GLEP 39.)

yngwin ... but this notion of a 'meritocracy' is somewhat vague if viewed from the basic categories provided by the political sciences.

We are really going off-topic here by discussing the theories of political science. Let's keep it practical.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF

khayyam
Watchman

Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 5:29 pm Post subject:

yngwin wrote:

khayyam wrote:

yngwin wrote:

Gentoo, just like most open source projects, is mostly a meritocracy. People who do the work get to make the decisions. (See GLEP 39.)

yngwin ... but this notion of a 'meritocracy' is somewhat vague if viewed from the basic categories provided by political sciences.

We are really going off-topic here by discussing the theories of political science. Let's keep it practical.

yngwin ... that would be: political science in relation to the form of "decision making", and the particular "*archy|*ocracy", gentoo functions as. If you think this is "off-topic" and impractical, then 1). what subject is political science meant to deal with? ... and, 2). why did you reply to krinn's question at all?

Krinn has already suggested this thread be split, which is probably a good idea, but if we are discussing "decision making" then all of my above comment is relevant.

best ... khay

yngwin
Retired Dev

Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4572
Location: Suzhou, China

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 5:40 pm Post subject:

khayyam wrote:

why did you reply to krinn's question at all?

Because he asked for clarification, and I gave it to him.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF

khayyam
Watchman

Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 6:25 pm Post subject:

yngwin wrote:

khayyam wrote:

why did you reply to krinn's question at all?

Because he asked for clarification, and I gave it to him.

yngwin ... that was part of a wider discussion on decision making, but anyhow, your reply to the question "why it is not [a democracy], what it is then, and justify it", is: "gentoo is not a democracy because its a meritocracy [and further discussion of this point is off-topic and/or not practical]"?

best ... khay

steveL
Watchman

Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 7:32 am Post subject:

yngwin wrote:

I am personally not on either side, as I see good and bad on both sides. But I really don't think that your combative word choice is helpful. If you want Gentoo developers to listen to the community and engage in open dialogue about how to best handle things, you really need to adopt a more cooperative and open manner. What I see here, and in various other posts in this thread and others, is really discouraging.

I must take issue with your words here; by all means tell someone that they're ranting, in whatever words you like. However, developer engagement with the community is not some favour that developers bestow upon users. It is how they do their job.

Thus it should not be predicated on how one individual, or any set of users, behaves. No-one's forcing anyone to do anything; but equally you cannot implicitly threaten to take all the toys out of the sandbox, unless everyone sucks up to you. You're part of the user community, just as much as anyone else, and we have every right to talk in this forum as we always have. Granted Naib is a bit polluted by his constant hanging-out in OTW, but the point stands: please do not take that line, as it is lame, counter-productive, and misses the wider picture by a barn-door.

NB: I am not saying you have to put up with anyone; nor that any user has the right to attack you personally. But the latter is because no user has the right to attack any other user personally. It has sweet FA to do with your badge.

I accept that you do engage, and applaud you for it. I just cannot stomach that "if you want us to play nicely" line. Do your jobs because you want to do them the best way you can, not because it means users can be put in place with a quick remark about your status.

You state you're not taking sides, but then proceed to circle the wagons, and present decisions from the developers as if they were taken by consensus. Utter nonsense, as we all know.

khayyam
Watchman

Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 11:27 am Post subject:

steveL wrote:

yngwin wrote:

I must take issue with your words here; [...]

steveL ... well said! ... and I'd add to this that it's this confusion, and/or vagueness, about gentoo's political makeup that acts as the force of attraction toward, or away from, "cooperation". Gentoo isn't a "meritocracy", if it were then this would make the entire principle of "cooperation", and the model used to facilitate that cooperation, entirely the domain of those who exercise power (or have control over the "decision making"). Where such control exists the principle of "cooperation" is without the prerequisite "acting together for common/mutual benefit". Gentoo is a democracy, though one that limits the recognition of "work", etc, to those granted the label "developer", and so contains oligarchic elements. This is functionally incorrect, as developers are only agents of the community, acting for the benefit of that community ... much the same as we (users) are by making bug reports, supporting users, etc, etc. If (as has already been explicated above with the "show us the code ... or get use to it" argument) developers use the specific nature of their contributions (ie, "the code") as the measure for what constitutes "work", then this can only be seen as a specific instance in which user contribution is de-valued ... and presents those who are merely agents of the community acting as the only properly active part of that community (with a right, by merit, to make decisions unilaterally).

If developers get to "decide" simply on the basis of merit then what role does the community have in this, are we not the very thing these decisions are directed toward, and doesn't that make us ("the many") the actual subject of political power when it comes to decisions? There is no other way to see this other than confused ... it is us, not they (as a separate body), that occupies the space of decision making ... they are our agents operating for the benefit of us, not themselves.

best ... khay

ff11
l33t
l33t

Joined: 10 Mar 2014
Posts: 664

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 1:37 pm Post subject:

khayyam wrote:

steveL wrote:

yngwin wrote:

I must take issue with your words here; [...]

Thanks khayyam and steveL! That are very wisdom words (at least for me).

yngwin wrote:

ff11 wrote:

* I have make a emerge --sync now, and the libav-11.2 is still masked. Why is masked if all have been fixed???

It is not masked. It is in ~arch, our testing branch, as per our usual policy.

ff11 wrote:

* I don't have one only problem with ffmpeg. I always used the ffmpeg, because I thought that the flag only provided the support if it there, and if I removed it would be without support (I'm not considered the default libav for long time), I think is the same for most of other users.

I don't see a question here. But if you're happy with using ffmpeg, by all means continue doing so. There is no pressing reason to switch.

ff11 wrote:

* If the ffmpeg are merging all the libav is doing, but the libav is ignoring the ffmpeg, then why the libav is the preferential??? And more, even if all people agree that is childish what is going on, why prefer the side that is doing this now??? At least the ffmpeg changed the attitude, right?

It's a messy situation, and I don't think either side is completely in the right. As I said before, I don't want to get into the politics of it. I am more interested in the features we experience as end-users. On that basis, as well as the prevailing sentiment of our users, I would say we need to change the default to ffmpeg. The reason libav is default is historical, because initially it was the more promising implementation. But the tactics of the ffmpeg developers have changed things again.

ff11 wrote:

* How is the maintenance policy on gentoo for these two packages and the consequences of the war (the bugs related)??? Who will fix it all the time???

Both are actively maintained, and will remain so.

ff11 wrote:

* The fix that are done by the libav on "January 17, 2015", but even with one libav devs we have to wait that long time with security issues on the hand??? The motivation for have the default libav is because of the libav dev, I supposed (Like I read before). That all API/ABI change don't help, don't is better be with the compatible side???

It is not clear-cut, and there are reasons to go with either implementation. This is why we offer both and leave the choice up to the user.

ff11 wrote:

* Do you really think that the future are going to be better if we go with libav???

I have no idea. I think the tide is turning in favour of ffmpeg again. Ideally we would see the two teams merging and working together again, but that is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Thanks yngwin. I understand your point now. And I want to wish good luck (something tells me that you will need).

yngwin
Retired Dev

Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4572
Location: Suzhou, China

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 2:06 pm Post subject:

steveL wrote:

However, developer engagement with the community is not some favour that developers bestow upon users. It is how they do their job.

Not necessarily. There is a high degree of independence for developers to do things as they see fit.

steveL wrote:

No-one's forcing anyone to do anything; but equally you cannot implicitly threaten to take all the toys out of the sandbox, unless everyone sucks up to you.

That's not how I meant it at all. I am simply trying to describe the reality, and trying to improve communication.

steveL wrote:

You're part of the user community, just as much as anyone else, and we have every right to talk in this forum as we always have.

Certainly. As long as everyone stays within the boundaries of the Code of Conduct (and I would say those lines have been crossed several times in discussing this issue).

But on the other hand, developers have just as much the right to ignore what is being said in this forum.

steveL wrote:

NB: I am not saying you have to put up with anyone; nor that any user has the right to attack you personally. But the latter is because no user has the right to attack any other user personally. It has sweet FA to do with your badge.

And I wasn't waving my badge. I was just pointing out that being judgemental, insulting, and disrespectful is not conducive to having a conversation. I don't need to put up with that, or see such language directed towards fellow developers. We are volunteers. We have better things to do with our time than such negativity.

steveL wrote:

I accept that you do engage, and applaud you for it.

Thanks. I came very close to just giving up. But I do have a little bit of idealism left, I guess.

steveL wrote:

I just cannot stomach that "if you want us to play nicely" line. Do your jobs because you want to do them the best way you can, not because it means users can be put in place with a quick remark about your status.

As I said, that was not at all how I meant it. I was simply pointing out cause and effect. Let's try to have a civilised conversation. If that is not possible here, then it will result in developers simply ignoring the forums. I'm speaking out because that is exactly what I don't like to happen.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF

yngwin
Retired Dev

Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4572
Location: Suzhou, China

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 2:14 pm Post subject:

khayyam wrote:

[...]This is functionally incorrect, as developers are only agents of the community, acting for the benefit of that community ... [...] they are our agents operating for the benefit of us, not themselves

You are completely wrong. Developers are volunteers. They do what they want, because it scratches a particular itch they have. For some that may be to serve the community, but for many that is a side benefit. As long as developers stay within the limits set by the GLEPs, the Council, and their appointed bodies (ComRel, QA), they can do as they please. The community isn't paying for their work, so it has no claim on what developers should be doing.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF

steveL
Watchman

Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 2:31 pm Post subject:

steveL wrote:

However, developer engagement with the community is not some favour that developers bestow upon users. It is how they do their job.

yngwin wrote:

Not necessarily. There is a high degree of independence for developers to do things as they see fit.

Yes, sure, but that does not change the fact that every developer and every programmer, has to deal with bugs.

Bugs that come from user reports, in the main. Especially so in FLOSS.

Quote:

steveL wrote:

No-one's forcing anyone to do anything; but equally you cannot implicitly threaten to take all the toys out of the sandbox, unless everyone sucks up to you.

That's not how I meant it at all. I am simply trying to describe the reality, and trying to improve communication.

Unfortunately that's how it comes across, because you bring into the conversation the fact that you are a developer.

If someone's being an asshat, you can just talk about the behaviour as one person to another, without mention of that fact. It is irrelevant to communication within a community: all that matters is that someone else is being overtly aggressive, hostile or plain rude.

And all too often that mantra (of "if you want us to engage, flatter us" -- because it sure ain't how we treat each other) tips over into "that's why I don't deal with users," which is the complete antithesis of what a FLOSS developer should be doing; most especially one working on ebuilds.

In a nutshell, personal issues are nothing to do with the work; and developers are just as prone to them as anyone else, if not more so as a collective by comparison to the user community, who are typically older and have had time to adjust to their issues.

So don't bring the work into interpersonal situations; it merely clouds the issue, and leads to developers thinking they deserve to be treated specially, but "users just don't get it", and users thinking that the developers are immature, egotistical and full of crap.

Both sides thus get switched off, and not only have you lost engagement, you've also made it much harder for anyone to even consider getting involved.
You also lose your sense of a cohesive community where both sides work together, instead of around each other.

Thanks for taking the time to consider this.
Regards,
steveL.

krinn
Watchman

Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 4:12 pm Post subject:

yngwin wrote:

Developers are volunteers. They do what they want, because it scratches a particular itch they have. For some that may be to serve the community, but for many that is a side benefit. As long as developers stay within the limits set by the GLEPs, the Council, and their appointed bodies (ComRel, QA), they can do as they please. The community isn't paying for their work, so it has no claim on what developers should be doing.

No, you are totally wrong : you can do what you want EXCEPT when you work for Gentoo. Nobody has anything to say about Luca's work on libav, he do what he wants as long as his work doesn't touch Gentoo: but libav INSIDE gentoo (the ebuild, the virtual and any changes made to gentoo to support or include or remove libav) is a different issue. And that is the issue we are speaking off here.
So you can scratches all itch you wish, but when your itch is related to Gentoo, you no more are free to do what you want, and yes, when you do, we expect your work to serve the community. And as such community have all right to claims anything on your work when your work is for the community.

The fact you are volunteer and you are not pay doesn't remove the fact you pass a contract with the community, not all devs can alter Gentoo: only Gentoo devs could and to be one, you must be a dev (that's the tests work) and "not insane" (that's the mentor's work), and by not insane we just expect a "little" (so little) social skill to interact with others (crushing hammer on everyone's head is a communication style nobody really wish) and respect some written rules (CoC, QA... for devs) AND unwritten one "not goes against the project you are volunteer to help". (or maybe someone has wrote it?).

I'm a gentoo user, i have no contract with Gentoo, because gentoo users have simply none.
I'm a gentoo forum user, i have a contract with the forum that is to respect the CoC of the forum. I'm not pay too, i'm not force to help anyone here : but if i post something to help someone, anyone expect me to post something that is not against the user (try answer "rm -rf /" to someone, you'll see mods have teeth).

khayyam
Watchman

Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 7:20 pm Post subject:

yngwin wrote:

khayyam wrote:

yngwin ... with all due respect, no, you are completely wrong ... regardless of what license you are provided by GLEP 39, or the values inculcated by your peers... and context for why this is the case, which you've selectively snipped, was made perfectly clear.

There are many reasons someone might become a developer, it may help them develop and hone their skills, help in their career path, help develop contacts, friendships, etc, scratch itches, etc, etc ... all of which are admirable and I have no issue with ... but its imperative that the work they do serves the community, not simply themselves. If they don't then we can simply abandon the idea of a community, or at least one worthy of the name.

Developers are no different than any other member of the community, except perhaps in that they are granted (and to some degree earn) certain rights, but they are not the only people who provide services to the community, and each one of us takes on responsibilities concomitant with the rights granted us. So, say, if reporting a bug we are expected to provide valid and usable data, be responsive to any requests made of us, etc, etc. Similarly with user support, we are required to provide valid responses to the questions put to us, follow the guidelines, CoC, etc. None of us is free of responsibility, we are all required to work with the benefit of the community in mind (call it: "acting together for common/mutual benefit"). That developer culture is inculcated with essentially anti-democratic, and egoistic, sentiment is a political issue that will inevitably lead to bad outcomes (read Machiavelli's Il Principe, Spinoza's Tractatus Politicus, La Boétie's Discours de la servitude volontaire ou le Contr'un, and many other work's on the subject ... all agree on the dangers of monarchical and oligarchic, rule).

Now, merit ... I don't know who the person, or persons, were who codified gentoo's current statutes, and position papers, but I don't imagine they were qualified to do so, programmers don't tend to come from the social sciences. That this seems to have lead toward this view within developers circles is unfortunate, if not inevitable ... but that the results are writ large, and yet wagons circled, suggests the worst.

best ... khay

John R. Graham
Administrator

Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 10655
Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia

Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 8:21 pm Post subject:

khay & krinn,

I started to say that I disagreed with you both: instead of yngwin being completely wrong, I believed he was almost completely right. I was going to cite the Code of Conduct:

Gentoo Code of Conduct wrote:

Gentoo prides itself on being a community driven distribution that acts with the best interest of the community at heart. Rules and regulations that keep us all moving in a forward direction are a reality for a community of this size.

and, later on

Gentoo Code of Conduct wrote:

Important
By joining and/or participating in the Gentoo community, you are stating that you accept and agree to adhere to the rules listed below, even if you do not explicitly state so.

As a consequence of this, all I thought yngwin would have needed to do to be completely right would have been to cite the Code of Conduct in his list of constraints. It could've merely been an omission and, after all, so long as their actions have "the best interest of the community at heart", doing what they want and scratching technical itches seems pretty good to me. However, reading further, it became pretty clear to me that the primary focus of that document is publicly visible communications. So, now I'm not sure. Which leads me to a few serious questions for yngwin in particular and perhaps other Gentoo Developers in general:

Do you believe that Gentoo prides itself on being a community driven distribution that acts with the best interest of the community at heart?
Do you believe that Gentoo Developers are required to act with the best interest of the community at heart?
If so, by what rules, stated where? (For example, is the Code of Conduct operative in the non-communications arena of Developer behavior?)
If not, do you think they should be?

I feel I have a vested interest in the answers to those questions, as I suspect do a lot of people who are participating here.

- John
_________________
I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters.

Display posts from previous:

	Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat	All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 1 of 5

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Copyright 2001-2024 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Designed by Kyle Manna © 2003; Style derived from original subSilver theme. | Hosting by Gossamer Threads Inc. © | Powered by phpBB 2.0.23-gentoo-p11 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Privacy Policy