Clarifications
January 14th, 2008I’m going to do a bit of clarification as there’s a lot of people who I’ve seen replied that don’t get truly what we are talking about here. Surprisingly so actually. As it stands there are two separate divisions in Gentoo Linux, have been for 2-3 years when daniel stepped down/forced down depending on who you talk to. I’ve created a handy little graphic for you 
As you can see in the above graph. Gentoo is divided into two distinct sides. Technical which everyone is worried about has almost nothing to do with this. Its only affected by the fact that Daniel could tell us today that we no longer can use Gentoo (new name time) or the G logo (new logo time). He has not done this in the 2-3 years that he’s still held onto these copyrights when we should of been properly incorporated as a foundation and had the transfer that he wanted to happen actually happen.
If you notice…ebuilds will still be here..developers will still be doing portage updates, things will continue on. This is not a death of gentoo technical..nor in anyway relates to them other then a possible name. Now assuming you got that can we please avoid the “we need to give gentoo back to daniel because the trustee’s failed and that means gentoo as a whole failed and its dying. Its simply not…we just have someone who’s very kindly allowing us silently to use his copyrights but at any time he’s able to tell us that we can’t use it anymore and would be changing all the materials that he holds copyright over. Everything that you as a user or a developer would use would be the same…just instead of Gentoo, you’d be using (We_lost_our_name_distro).
Now as far as daniels post, please excuse the bit of sarcasm involved but here is another graph that shows his plan.
As you see this plan brings the Foundation and the Council under the same umbrella. With Daniel as the head of the organization electing the other trustee’s who will oversee both the technical direction as well as the financial/legal aspects…which as I mentioned previously is very hard to find in anyone who would be able to be elected. If you talk to Mike(vapier) for instance. He has no desire to deal with the “foundation” aspects but has done very well as a member of the Council. Diego (flameeyes) I have no doubt would say the same thing. He’d much rather be coding and working to improve Gentoo then having to deal with the potential…oh this person wants to be reimbursed for printing up a banner for the Germany linux symposium that we were represented at.
Now please note that it is a lot of sarcasm in that picture with the “yes men/women” but I’m fairly certain that while Daniel has good intentions at heart, he’d elect/select people who generally agree with his point’s but not be the best for the role. While I don’t follow the Councils actions much, I see them actually making progress. Which you can actually see here in the logs and summary of the meetings. If you want to talk about transparency, there you go meetings are actually posted with what was discussed in both raw and summary format.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Now that really clears things up for me. Thanks.
But that still doesn’t explain to me why gentoo “appears” to grind to a halt (Note that I know it’s not the case since I get package updates flying in daily). I mean the lack of newsletters and scheduled releases are an issue. An organizational problem or is simply manpower needed here? I doubt that because if that would be the case a simple “call for volunteers” in the forums or in a short newsletter could change that. I don’t want to start a discussion here I just wanted to express my confusion.
Bye
January 14th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
You don’t get it tsunam do u?
What we trying to say is that BOTH divisions have FAILED to do their job from the time Daniel left.
Ofc it started with the problems that occurred in foundation but what would u expect? None talk about the technical problems too?
So please, users understand enough to demand you all wannabe leaders step aside and let Robbins take care of it with his own way.
If you don’t like his way or if you “can’t deal with both technical and foundation aspect (lol reason)” well you are free to go… sry… not hurt feelings
January 14th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Thanks Joshua,
for putting up these explanations. At least, you are one “semi-official” source emitting some information.
“I’m going to do a bit of clarification as there’s a lot of people who I’ve seen replied that don’t get truly what we are talking about here. Surprisingly so actually.”
Oh, why is this suprising? Most users read the homepage and the GWN. Those are kinda rare on information. Surprisingly so actually. Well gentoo-users are still a pretty awesome community and are digging through mailing lists and irc backlogs to find out what the heck is going on. Surprisingly so actually.
“If you notice…ebuilds will still be here..developers will still be doing portage updates, things will continue on. This is not a death of gentoo technical..nor in anyway relates to them other then a possible name.”
Actually gentoo technical is in trouble. All administrative projects in gentoo seem to have outright failed or are in deep fundamental trouble (PR, DevRel, UserRel, to some extend RelEng). I dont think you can deny that, given that gentoo was the headline on major newssite (like slashdot and various others) TWO DAYS AGO and there is still no official statement (not even an “there is no need to panic, we will publish an extensive comment later). What do you gain by having the greatest rocket engine on the earth, if your team fails to organize fuel?
“With Daniel as the head of the organization electing the other trustee’s who will oversee both the technical direction as well as the financial/legal aspects…which as I mentioned previously is very hard to find in anyone who would be able to be elected.”
My understanding of Daniels Post is that he does not want an election. He wants to just nominate trustees. I see that this is unrealstic, but I hoped I would finally provoke gentoo-devs to find a roadmap out of the mess gentoo it is currently in. That didnt happen apparently. Surprisingly so actually.
I am shocked that you seem to think “every admistrative project in gentoo failed, so what? Hey guys, we still have ebuild!”.
But again: I thank you for posting (and other devs who posted in the forums).
Yours,
Björn
P.S.: gentoo-users seem not be to worried by the possible _consequences_ of the end of the foundation. The scary part is how it could actually happen at all. Especially in a way that looks like an accident and an result of ignorance, carelessness and indifference.
January 14th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
You are a tool box. No, you are not right, and the lackluster leadership you have displayed and defend are the reason for the downfall of Gentoo. Thanks.
January 14th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Everyone here who is attacking Tsunam…remember that all developers are volunteers who are doing what they are doing because they want to make Gentoo better, which ultimately means making it better for *you*. There seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction among the developers with Daniel’s plan, and if they up and leave like some of you say then what makes Gentoo great goes with them. I think even just losing vapier would put the project on life support.
I applaud Tsunam for making a very rational and flame-free “state of affairs” post, even after reading through most of the very long forum thread, I hadn’t realized that the current roles of the Foundation and Council would be merging under Daniel’s plan. This decides it for me, if Daniel isn’t willing to make some amendments to his plan then the answer to his offer should definitely be “no thanks”.
Here’s hoping for a painless resolution to this mess, and a return to the Gentoo that I know and love.
January 14th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Seriously, this is ridiculous. People like you make this project suck more and more. I don’t know you and I don’t know Daniel but as an experienced manager I look at the current state of Gentoo and it’s so obvious you don’t get it.
Right now Gentoo is going downhill, it’s not fun anymore, people are aggressive in their comments, more so today then before and yet you find the time for sarcasm…? Seriously get your head out of your ass if you can (because it must be fucking huge at this point) and do something about the crap that’s going on and not contribute to it. Daniels made Gentoo what it was, fun and innovative. Was he a dictator? Maybe. So what? CEOs are assholes and that can make a company really successful. People like you are only nuisance.
Get a clue. Stop bitching more acting. Make Gentoo what it was, then make it better. Then and only then be sarcastic or even mean if you want because you earned it.
January 14th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
To me is says a lot that users aren’t mentioned anywhere in your post.
I really appreciate the work of the devs but to me Gentoo is nothing if it’s just ebuilds and money.
I do appreciate that you said *something*. If there is anyone in charge then there should be *something* on the homepage. The wiki has a page but it’s been nominated for deletion.
January 14th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
tsunam: I think that your diagram of the new layout does injustice to drobbin’s idea, if you examine the logs from his discussion in #gentoo-dev last evening (dberkholz posted it to core).
Specifically, he does not say that council is going away, merely that the foundation will be setting high-level strategic goals resulting from discussions with Council, Devs and Users. The council then helps out with the actual detailed technical goals resulting from the strategic goals. 4 x86/amd releases/year was one example he gave, if it was justified by a survey of users.
January 14th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
I’ll read over that and make an updated graphic…
January 15th, 2008 at 12:24 am
“Daniel has good intentions at heart, he’d elect/select people who generally agree with his point’s but not be the best for the role.”
Why wouldn’t they be the best for the role? If Daniel trust them and choose them it’s certainly because he think they can make the work done. That’s what a good manager is, even if sometimes you may disagree with their decisions. There is always a good reason for such decisions and Gentoo is not a “profit as first goal” organization, so the decisions taken will always be for the well being of Gentoo.
LaMs
January 15th, 2008 at 4:30 am
The call for a “strong leader”…
Gentoo is in some trouble after the Gentoo Foundation, the legal body that takes care of Gentoo’s funds, was revoked for lack of proper filings of paper. This brought in Daniel Robbins with his offer to take over leadership again.
Now that would be…
January 15th, 2008 at 4:34 am
I was going to say this in reply to tsunam’s other post, but didn’t have the chance.
I agree with him and the other developers and users that support him and his perspective.
The majority of Gentoo developers and Gentoo power users or Gentoo users that are not Daniel fanboys realise that this isn’t the end of Gentoo.
Daniel’s solution isn’t designed to benefit Gentoo more than it is designed to benefit himself.
Even so it is being considered by Council. All of the people that just look on the website and GWN need to start using their brains when reading FUD on Slashdot.
Tsunam your points are well spoken / typed.
January 15th, 2008 at 7:21 am
Appleman1234: How exactly will Daniel PROFIT from “overtaking” Gentoo? I just don’t get it. Could you explain that?
January 15th, 2008 at 8:48 am
I’ve read Daniel’s comments and I’ve read your comments, and to a reader who is new situation, Daniel comes across as the much more mature and level-headed party. Sarcasm, in particular, doesn’t play well if you’re trying to argue a point.
Here are the things I think you’re missing:
Firstly I think you downplay the problems of a lack of legal framework. It’s more than just a name change: The project could lose its entire legal identity. For the hobbyist developer it probably doesn’t matter much, but for the average user or company this is a big deal. Big companies get sued for copyright abuse, users won’t touch a distro that look likes it’ll be gone tomorrow, and no developer will invest any time in such a project.
Secondly, it really doesn’t sound like Daniel is making Gentoo his personal fiefdom. It sounds like he’s a little bit annoyed that his creation is going to the dogs (wouldn’t you be slightly off if you had created something, handed it over and watched it fall to pieces), and he wants to give Gentoo the credibility injection it needs.
Finally, how about another suggestion: Rather than spending your time bickering and making sarcastic posts, why not do the job you were elected to do, and get some paperwork sorted out?
January 15th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Sadly, no he can’t onion. The issue is, it simply isn’t true. Tsunam is right that as a developer, we aren’t really affected at all currently, unless Daniel decided to not let us use the Gentoo name any longer. The issue I have is - we keep electing trustees, and they continue to…. sit around with their thumbs up their bums. And so… suddenly we can make it so this doesn’t happen? If it happens year after year, why would it be different this time?
January 15th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Tsunam, don’t get upset by the groupthink of “experienced managers”. Gentoo is awesome because leadership is organic, bottom-up, and from developers.
It’s amazing how easily people are cowed by managerial rhetoric.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
Gentoo was better when Drobbins was in charge years back. And bringing the Foundation and the Council under the same umbrella is a good idea. Please come back, Drobbins!
January 16th, 2008 at 6:16 am
I agree whole-heartedly that there should be a separation of business and technical, as they don’t always have the same objectives. That is what can make a community project like this great, and also lends itself to the versatility of Gentoo and its userbase.
I’ve been using Gentoo for about 5 years, and plan to for a long time to come.
January 18th, 2008 at 1:37 am
Tsunam I really appreciate your work as a developer for Gentoo. As a developer you have certain rights and responsibilities to Gentoo, that I, as a user, do not have. Thus it greatly saddens me to see your woeful ignorance of the history of Gentoo and particularly that of Daniel Robbins departure from Gentoo. It also saddens me that you ridicule this situation while clearly showing that you do not even get what the real complaints are, and how you are not even willing to acknowledge such complaints, let alone the user community, which also *constitutes* Gentoo.
Your blog post is anything but constructive, informative or helpful in the current situation-it is simply juvenile and ignorant. Take it from somebody who has been involved in Gentoo as a user for twice as long as you have-if you don’t know about the circumstances surrounding Daniel Robbins departure please take the time to inform yourself-do some actual reading instead of listening to the rants of your fellow devs who are equally ignorant about the history of Gentoo.
I am sure if you took the time to inform yourself, instead of simply regurgitating what others have told you, others who obviously were not around when Drobbins departed, you might win some appreciation for the complaints voiced and begin to understand the abyss in dev-user relations which is threatening Gentoo as a whole.
January 18th, 2008 at 9:47 am
wow….for you to have been at it 2x longer then me, that’d be 1997…Gentoo (enoch) didn’t come into existance until 1999..
that’s all I really need to say in response to you.
January 21st, 2008 at 1:41 am
The main problem to gentoo is that it’s users are either developers / IT students who don’t want their distro to get in their way and don’t have time to work on it
or “drobbins come back coz the ebuildz don’t work!1!”-kiddies :>
I’m glad the majority of gentoo devs doesn’t seem to give in to this “strong leader” offer - sad enough that the current issues are so exaggerated in the news.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:21 am
One simple comparison, Ubuntu. It’s has a leader (main head, whatever you want to name it), has vision. Is he a dictator? Who cares. The project is moving, introducing exciting features to distributions, raising the usability standards, supporting Open Source software and freedom.
No matter the distribution, you’ll find one, or in some cases various heads in charge. But most cases usually a bigger one will take the final decisions at the end.
While packages has been keep usually up to date (thanks to devs for that), the project needs direction, needs to take decisions. If the current trustees can’t deal with that efficiently, then allow Daniel to try to fix it.
He mention that we will assign new trustees. Well, like in any organization, a leader will not lay or delegate it’s work to people that no matter the reason already proved to be incompetent. What do you expect, that with this mess he will keep the current trustees? If I’ll be in his place, I will do the same.