Re: Getting to Topaz (Was Re: getting on a longer release cycled)

Havoc Pennington wrote:
I think the best shot at this would be to gather a small group that agrees on some audience they want to try and do stuff for, and just start doing it; I'm not sure how the overall GNOME boat can be turned up front, it's probably not possible. The small group would have to be prepared for potentially large divergence from the existing gnome-panel/nautilus/etc. desktop codebase - they would need to be open to doing very different things either instead or in addition, if that made sense to provide the benefits to the audience.
"...gather a small group" - this reminds the infamous lack-of-leadership Gnome problem (at least from the outsider perspective)

I was once lurking around and there was an interesting accident. One guy said about Israel that "it is evil" and another (Jeff Waugh?) was trying to moderate him.

One Russian philosopher said that the government should not lead people to heaven. Instead it must prevent them to fall into hell. That accident hinted me an interesting solution to Gnome leadership problem.

From the business point of view the majority of foss projects (including successful) are in a strange state that may be called as a "permanent crisis". When something is in a crisis, who is needed? Anti-crisis manager! So, some (if not majority) foss projects instead of leaders need permanent anti-crisis management. This is especially true for Gnome due to a nature of its community - a union of several development groups who cannot fully unite because they develop different applications (at least I see it this way). It seems that Gnome is like a country with several political parties, but if Gnome is meritocracy this country does not need traditional government that is elected by democratic procedures.

Now to the point. Every society needs some mechanism to protect itself from falling into hell. For example, on many public forums there is a special position that is called Moderator. As I said, Gnome is not suitable for traditional form of leadership, so the most logical way to keep order here is to introduce a position of Moderator, an anti-crisis manager. You may call him Gnome Sheriff if you like Westerns as I do.

Gnome Sheriff must be elected by some formal procedure (better by democratic voting). His main responsibility - moderate mailing lists from bullshit, destroy crazy ideas before they infect people, protect project ideology, etc.

I think it is not only useful and fun but will bring some stability and direction here, won't it?!

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]