User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development

Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development

Posted Jun 3, 2014 9:48 UTC (Tue) by johannbg (subscriber, #65743)
In reply to: Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development by fandingo
Parent article: Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development

"I'm trying to figure out what caused your falling-out with Red Hat."

You will need to look at the entire history of my participation in Fedora to figure that one out but by my observation and interaction all those years you can split Red Hat employees within the project into three categories

Red Hat employees that are participating on their own accord and on their own time

Red Hat employees that are doing this as a part of their job description and because they want to as in they are interested in Fedora and it's community

Red Hat employees that are doing this as a part of their job description and not because they want to but have to but otherwise have no interest in Fedora

You got teams within Red Hat that know how to engage with communities ( ARM ) and you've got teams within Red Hat that do not ( Red Hat Gnome Desktop Team )

You got people within Red Hat living it's HQ ivory tower that like to invent sub-community leadership positions then dump people outside the community into those position and then you have people within Red Hat that actually spot where in the community assistance is needed and is valuable and pick people from within the community to work on it full time to strengthen that part of the community.

Then you have all the little RH internal empires fighting themselves which spreads like infections decease into the Fedora project with each of our own governing structure design to supporting those tiny little internal empires to continue that power struggle while the project is being shaped into the next RHEL version.

Long story put short we cannot fix the management problem within Red Hat and the RHEL employees that are running the shots within Fedora are not the RHEL people that should be running the shot within Fedora for the best possible outcome for the community and the project in whole.

"By all indications, you were heavily active in Fedora until 2013, and then something changed."

The change in direction of the project and realization happened on how things are truly run in the project.

"Were you looking for a job there?"

I have never looked for or applied for a job at Red Hat as far as I can recall but twice I have been offered one and on both times I declined the job offer for reasons which are entirely irrelevant to the project at hand,it's teams, their leaders and the people I would have worked with since I know they are all good people.


(Log in to post comments)

Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development

Posted Jun 3, 2014 12:11 UTC (Tue) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link]

> The change in direction of the project and realization happened on how things are truly run in the project.

You've said quite a lot without actually saying anything about why *you* left, and why you are coming across like a jilted lover. (Seriously, you sound very bitter!)

What is this "change of direction", from what to what? How are things "truly" run, compared to how they are supposed to be run?

I'm not the only one here genuinely interested in the specifics.

Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development

Posted Jun 3, 2014 14:12 UTC (Tue) by johannbg (subscriber, #65743) [Link]

"You've said quite a lot without actually saying anything about why *you* left"

Now that it has been made public I can say the newly appointment [¹] benevolent dictator Matthew Miller and his future vision and direction plays a huge role in that.

Putting an individual in the leadership chair after he leaves a man hanging [2], to lead an entire community is the most stupid thing people in charge of the project have ever done.

This man is no leadership material and cannot be trusted period so behold as the worst project leader in the history of the project steps into it's spotlight.

If you think it was for a huge of luck that he was put by Red Hat in the project leader chair you are wrong.

Other reason includes wide variety of Red Hat systematically keeping progress and involvement in the community back while discriminating community contributions by elevating their own products above the community ones.

"And why you are coming across like a jilted lover. (Seriously, you sound very bitter!)"
Because I am for the personal sacrifices I made for the greater good of the project.

Mostly angry at my self for being so stupid for not listening to the warning I was given around FC6/F7 and believe of what the project allegedly stood for and represented and be dumb enough to think I could changed and being stubborn when I realize I could not so I could finish the systemd integration into the project as I signed up for.

The project is changing direction from a generic distribution to a targeted distribution without the people behind it thinking things thoroughly through, leaving contributors scratching their heads trying to figure out how it affects them.

Just catch up on .next and wg's and products and the brainwashing material on the net. Then take a good hard look into it from various affected community perspective.

1. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/...
2. https://plus.google.com/+LennartPoetteringTheOneAndOnly/p...

Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development

Posted Jun 5, 2014 15:33 UTC (Thu) by pjones (subscriber, #31722) [Link]

If you think it was for a huge of luck that he was put by Red Hat in the project leader chair you are wrong.
...
The project is changing direction from a generic distribution to a targeted distribution without the people behind it thinking things thoroughly through, leaving contributors scratching their heads trying to figure out how it affects them.

The directional change in Fedora has been led almost exclusively by people on FESCo, and everybody involved was elected in a reasonably free and fair way. Everybody involved has also been elected or re-elected since we've started going down the current path.

mattdm has been a large and incredibly positive part of that. It's completely unfair to him to to suggest this is somehow wrongdoing; clearly he was elected to FESCo by other Fedora contributors that liked what he was doing, and the same is true of the rest of FESCo.

While I'm in no position to know the decision making process to choose the FPL, it wasn't surprising (or "huge of luck") that he was chosen — he's done a great job, and people who take leadership roles and work well with others are the people who get selected for other leadership roles. Aside from that, the role of FPL has little direct impact on technical direction of Fedora. That's chosen by FESCo, in coordination with the Board.

Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development

Posted Jun 5, 2014 16:57 UTC (Thu) by johannbg (subscriber, #65743) [Link]

Since you've decided to try to back this up with the current election process in the project you might want to explain to the audience how large number of Fedora contributors actually participate in the election and how many of those are Red Hat employees backing up the next RHEL 8 vision which they themselves are working on so people can actually see how representing for the community those elections are ( which in turn will invalidate what you or anyone else that matter tries to justify anything based on the outcome of the project election process as well as highlight the fact that there is something seriously wrong with our election process since people from the community aren't participating enough in it )

And when it comes to FESCo and election, on numerous occasion while participating in the community I heard from several individuals that did not want to run for FESCo due to the fact there where always they same Red Hat employees hogging every seat ( Kyle cropping up to hold that pattern true these days ) preventing fresh perspective from the community or just even within Red Hat from taking place because people where afraid going against the stone age fractiont. ( which again just highlight the fact there there is something significantly wrong with the election process since there is not enough diversity in individuals nominating themselves to participates in various governing entities within the project. )

Alot of good thing he did you say like backstabbing Lennart or when he tries to force me to adjust my cron to time feature migration to accommodates his cloud /container vision then hijack my cron to time migration feature proposal which does not even make sense since to be able to implement what he suggested we would have had to create several new targets and at that point you are forced to write new proposal and we could just as well migrate everything to timer units, which we technically cant at this point and probably never will since cronie and timer units aren't interchangeable components. They complement each others shortcoming.

Every time I was going to confront him on certain things he said on that ticket or even trying to understand why he was so obsessed with this he conveniently was absent from the FESCo meeting.

The fact is that anyone that does not have shit for brains has spotted far greater leadership material in Stephen Gallagher who has been part of the new future vision from the get go while showing true leadership skills while doing so, If the underlying political move for Matt's choosing boiled down to support the RHEL 8 next release as in the.next and wg proposal.

If that was not the reason for Matt being chosen you have much more capable people leading the project both within Red Hat and outside it with women candidates taking precedence over male once ( With Máirín probably top on that list after years of dedication to the project or Ruth ) .

In the end of the day what Matt has demonstrated is that he cant be trusted for anything else than leading his left foot in front of the right.

Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development

Posted Jun 9, 2014 23:38 UTC (Mon) by AdamW (subscriber, #48457) [Link]

You could consider the possibility that any one or more of those folks was offered the FPL job but declined. It's not a job everyone wants to do. I know for certain that several people have been offered it and declined at various of the handover points.

(Note that I am speaking in generalities here; I have no specific information as regards any of those particular people. I'm just pointing out a possibility you seem to be overlooking.)

Questioning corporate involvement in GNOME development

Posted Jun 10, 2014 0:44 UTC (Tue) by johannbg (subscriber, #65743) [Link]

Interesting that you assumed I had already not considered that, based on one of our talks and what we both know so you should give me a bit more credit than that, but the fact is in the end of the day it's irrelevant since you don't put people with characteristics like Matt has shown into leadership positions so he never should have been on that list to begin with.

The possibility I did not take into account was that people that are behind this process within Red Hat did, since up to this point they have been smarter than this ( which indicates they might have been replaced ) so one can only speculate what went through Denise mind when she signed this off for the project and who managed to cloud her judgment since she should have stopped this nonsense from happening in the first place.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds