Re: FWD: Re: Linus is on a powertrip..

1998-10-09 Thread Raul Miller
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is from the linux kernel mailing list. I find it pretty completly sums
> op my thoughts on all the new constitution and voting and policy voting
> stuff that we've been setting up. I haven't been vocal about this, but I
> think we've been moving in the wrong direction.

Perhaps.

Remember that a lot of the focus on debian is still: the individual
developer does the development.  Debian as a whole doesn't *do*
development, we do testing and coordination.

But probably this is meaningful for projects like dpkg.

> Of course, this came up on linux kernel because Linus is showing signs of
> burnout - just like Bruce burnt out. The benevolent dicator system isn't
> perfect.

Of course, Linus is now a father and has a full-time job. The demands
of which are likely to reduce his sense of humor for people saying that
it's too much work to send him a patch when he's getting so many that a
number of them drop on the floor, and even those that don't may sit in
his queue for a while.

-- 
Raul



Re: FWD: Re: Linus is on a powertrip..

1998-10-03 Thread Joey Hess
Kai Henningsen wrote:
> Linus is the main developer for Linux. That makes him a good benevolent  
> dictator. Debian does not have a main developer; Ian has a political, not  
> a technical, job.

Linus's position is just as political as Ian's, it's just not so obvious
because the difference in the development models keep the politics queter,
and resolves issues faster without as much debate.

-- 
see shy jo



Re: FWD: Re: Linus is on a powertrip..

1998-10-03 Thread Kai Henningsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joey Hess)  wrote on 02.10.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> This is from the linux kernel mailing list. I find it pretty completly sums
> op my thoughts on all the new constitution and voting and policy voting
> stuff that we've been setting up. I haven't been vocal about this, but I
> think we've been moving in the wrong direction.

OTOH, *I* believe we're moving in the right direction because the past has  
shown that, for whatever reason, our social dynamics are such that the  
original model doesn't work for us.

Incidentally, I think the reasons are actually obvious once you think  
about it. With Linux, Linus is the one that keeps the kernel source. He  
decides about every bit that goes in. Debian, OTOH, doesn't have any  
comparable position, and in all the time I've been here (since  
.99something), it never had one. Oh, it may have had one in the very  
beginning, but if so, it was already abandoned back in the .99something  
days.

To put it a different way ...

Linus is the main developer for Linux. That makes him a good benevolent  
dictator. Debian does not have a main developer; Ian has a political, not  
a technical, job.

Linus *acts* as a dictator. He dictates what goes into the kernel, and  
what doesn't. Debian has nothing comparable. There is no instance we have  
to pass to get stuff into the distribution. Indeed. I suspect many  
developers would leave were there such a choke point.

Linux kernel development is almost completely different from Debian  
distribution development. That's why Ian's job description differs from  
Linus'.

MfG Kai