Re: Discussing issues

On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 04:05:06PM -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 03:18:56PM -0400, David Dawes wrote:
>> >> >Let me be crystal clear: this is NOT a favorable outcome while I'm
>> >> >wearing any of my hats, from Red Hat to freedesktop.org to just plain
>> >> >old Havoc.
>> >> 
>> >> And neither is any outcome that disenfranchises those XFree86
>> >> developers with the most time and effort invested in XFree86 itself.
>> >> 
>> >
>> >Great, so let's design a third outcome.
>> >
>> >Strawman proposal: we create a fairly open infrastructure/process
>> 
>> I guess you really don't get it.  Improved communication/dialogue
>> somehow got morphed into a whole new infrastructure and bureaucratic
>> process?  You're joking, right?
>
>I don't understand. In what I proposed, you would make a release with
>the same group you do now, using the same process you do now.

So what is changing?  If the way we operate isn't changing, what is?

I thought the point was improved communication.  Is that wrong?
I'd like to understand what you are really aiming for.  

The bottom line is that XFree86 continue to do the things that it wants
to do, as an independent organisation of individuals.  We don't want to
be forced to fit into someone else's grand plan.  If you want improved
coordination and communication with XFree86, then attempting to impose
any additional structures on us, however "light weight" you might claim
them to be, is counter-productive.  And of course the rhetorical question
always comes up, if it's so light weight why have it?

It sounds to me like this umbrella idea is a back door way of influencing
XFree86 by political control.  If you want to make progress on what you
consider the issues, then make the issues discrete and well-defined.
The "agenda" from "your group" is too diffuse for any of us to really
figure out what you are thinking concerning the most important issues.

It is your group making demands from XFree86, not the other way around.
And I have yet to hear what benefit this gives XFree86.  I can see how
the umbrella benefits, but what about us? I represent XFree86 and only
XFree86, not the "community", not anyone else. My interest lies solely
with what is best for XFree86 and those who have invested the most effort
in XFree86 over the last eleven years.  I have no other agenda than that
as leader of XFree86.

BTW, if there is to be an umbrella, I personally like the "umbrella"
under which you said the 3 BSDs sit.  It's news to me that anything
formal exists, so this kind of notional umbrella which is totally unlike
anything you've described sounds good to me!  By that analogy we're all
under a notional "X" umbrella right now anyway :-) which sounds fine to me.

As for you Havoc, who do you speak for and what can you deliver? 

Speaking for XFree86,

David
-- 
David Dawes
Founder/committer/developer                     The XFree86 Project
www.XFree86.org/~dawes