On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:59:40AM +0000, Peter Stuge wrote: > Daniel Campbell wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 12:18:04AM +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > > I'd like to establish the following changes to the mailing lists: > > > > > > 1. Posting to gentoo-dev@ and gentoo-project@ mailing lists will be > > > initially restricted to active Gentoo developers. > > > > I don't think this plan will have the effect you're going for, > > I agree, and I'll double down on my previous comment on this proposal: > > I consider the proposal to be the wrong solution. > > > > but let's be honest here: the "RFC" is just a formality; the decision's > > already been made. > > I hope that a mere proposal doesn't automatically mean policy change. >
If proposals come from a select couple of people, there are high odds that it's been discussed privately and the relevant people've been convinced or otherwise pushed to implement the change. By the time it hits the list, any cricitism is met with "too bad, we're doing it anyway". I'm not sure how new you are to Gentoo, but it's been this way since at least 2012. > > > If the "real leaders" of Gentoo want to divide and fragment the > > community, it's their prerogative. > > When there is a request for comments, there should also be comments. :) > > Far too many fall into the simple trap that is tribalism, and I'd like > to encourage everyone on this list to not be that kind of person, > because there really is no "us and them", there is only "us". > I think the plan to split mailing lists serves as a way to insulate developers from the effects of their decisions. Anyone with an incongenial tone will have their voice bit revoked and their mail will be dropped or rejected. It will likely be a silent rejection, so the fallout is minimal. The plan itself is a manifestation of tribalism. The "us" is a select group of people who've been blessed by mgorny and friends. Everyone else is deemed a "do nothing" or some other insult, regardless of their history or efforts with the distribution. Yes, talking about that is ugly, but it's the truth. I've been on the receiving end of it multiple times and have been witness to it many others. It shows up in just about every corner of Gentoo. Creating a technical schism won't fix it. > > > As we tell users who do something they're not supposed to: You get > > to keep the pieces. > > Well, let's see what happens, now that both developers and > non-developers have clearly spoken out *against* this proposal. > I'm not holding my breath on any positive change, but we'll see. It's not like we have a choice in the matter. I guess we'll have to subscribe to yet another mailing list if we want to stay informed. Maybe in a year's time, we'll have gentoo-dev-expert as well, so the Chosen Ones don't have to deal with developers they don't like. This is my last mail in this thread. I've made my points and know they will fall on deaf ears. You're not wrong in your approach; I don't share that faith, is all. So I hope you don't interpret this as me yelling at you. > > Kind regards > > //Peter > -- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer, Trustee, Treasurer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
