Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 18:20:26 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@online.fr>, Alexandr Kovalenko <never@nevermind.kiev.ua>, chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dillon@'s commit bit: I object Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030203180641.90992E-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20030203184103.K16840@hub.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Robert Watson wrote: > > > reasonable, expected, or acceptable. Obviously, this is subject to > > interpretation and debate, but I'd ask that those passing judgement on > > this action take into account that this was given long and hard > > consideration, and that it was not a decision taken lightly or without > > regret. > > the thing is, you have on the one side -core that wants him gone, and, > from what I can see, non-core that doesn't want him gone ... considering > how much of a beauraucracy this has become, maybe there should be some > sort of referundum(sp?) on issues like this? Where the userbase has > some sort of a say? Portraying this as "Core vs Dillon" is a gross mis-characterization. The Core Team is elected by the FreeBSD developer team as a whole, and exists to serve a number of roles. Among them is conflict resolution, in which developers can seek mediation in solving technical or FreeBSD-related conflicts between developers. Core decisions are frequently the outcome of such mediation, or the outcome of many instances of mediation. In this case, it was the outcome of a long series of issues over a long period of time. How to involve all stakeholders in conflict resolution is an interesting question, and one that I think far larger groups than the FreeBSD Project have struggled in dealing with. > It just seems that there are some pretty critical issues that are being > handled, and its hurting both sides of the project ... the userbase by > the loss of some serious players, and the core themselves by the flames > thye are getting for the decisions ... :( Agreed. Any time you deal with critical issues of this sort, there is the opportunity for damage. Unfortunately, the basic premise is that things are already damaging, or we wouldn't be in the situation in the first place. So the task becomes to take the path of least damage, which is a difficult balancing act. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Network Associates Laboratories To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030203180641.90992E-100000>