On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 04:10:45PM -1000, Public mailing list for Arch Linux development wrote: > Hi Christian, > > [2019-06-02 01:08:30 +0200] Christian Rebischke via arch-dev-public: > > inspired by the last thread about moving proprietary software to > > community, our general problem of getting more people involved in Arch > > Linux and the (for me) chaotic organisation structure and hierarchy I > > would like to propose a discussion about changes. > > I seem to recall we've had a similar discussion just a couple of months > ago but allow me to reiterate some key points. > > First, contrary to what you keep saying, the process by which devs make > decisions is very clear: by discussing things until a consensus emerges. > In extreme cases where a consensus cannot be reached, we can take a vote > or let our leader decide, but this has never happened in the nine years > I've been a dev.
Hi Gaetan, Thanks for your mail. I remember now that you have told me this some months ago. This leads to a question: Why are these types of dicussions not public? > I've been a dev. To the best of my knowledge, we're all very happy with > this system and do not want to change it. Who do you mean with 'we'? Are you sure you speak for all devs and TUs here? > Second, our current organizational structure has served us well for many > years. What problem are you trying to solve by overhauling it? What > piece of evidence do you have that your suggestions will fix those > problems? I'm certainly going to support imposing more bureaucracy just > for the sake of bureaucracy. Again, if a certain system works for TUs, > I'm glad and I'm certainly not going to impose my views on how TUs work; > after all, that's why the TUs were made a self-governing body. Well, that's point. I don't really think the current system works as it could be. Why being happy with the current state of organisation if we could achieve much more with a more simplified and more contributor friendly model? And this 'self-governing body' is exactly what I don't like. It increases this 'we and them' like thinking. Furthermore my suggestions are not the best solution, it was just a start for discussing our current structure. If you and the others see no point in changing the current structure this is totally fine, I just think it's important to rethink processes from time over time. > > Cheers. > > -- > Gaetan
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
