On cooperative work [Was: Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..]

[Doug Barton]

On 8/1/2012 8:36 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> I think this proves the point everybody has been saying: you are being needlessly contrary and confrontational.

Actually if you take a step back and look at what Arnaud is saying
objectively, he's right. If anyone can attend the meeting by simply
getting an invitation from a committer, the only purpose the invitation
serves is to force the mere-mortal user to kiss someone's ring. That's
precisely the kind of elitist crap that I've been railing against for so
many years now.

OTOH, currently the dev summits generally take place with limited
resources, so it's not really possible to have "everyone" attend. And
(TMK) the "invitation" process is really  more like a restaurant with a
sign that says "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."

But on the _other_ other hand, the problem of things being discussed
and/or decisions being taken exclusively at the dev summits, especially
BSDCAN, has gotten quite bad over the last several years. Even amongst
committers, the community has become divided between the "haves" who can
travel to the summit, and the "have nots" who can't. Note, I'm quite
sure that this statement will be met with howls of protest, from the
"haves," that this isn't the case. Even if they were sincere, it's
incredibly easy for the people with the privileges to see their
privileged state as "normal," and lose sight of how the world looks from
the cheap seats.

In spite of Kevin's concerns (and I don't know what working groups he's
been attending) the IETF model is really a good one to examine here. The
majority of the work gets done on the mailing lists, with working group
meetings serving as an opportunity for group discussion, presentations,
etc. The results of the meetings are then published to the mailing list
in the form of minutes, and the final decisions are made in public, on
the lists. Another incredibly important feature, the meetings are open
to remote participation in the sense that slide decks are published in
advance, the meeting audio is streamed live, and there are jabber rooms
for remote participants to interact with the people in the meeting.

I used to ask the PTB to provide *some* form of remote participation for
even a fraction of the events at the dev summit. I don't bother asking
anymore because year after year my requests were met with any of:
indifference, hostility, shrugged shoulders (that's a hard problem that
we can't solve), or embarrassment. Since if the right people around here
want something to happen, it happens; I finally came to the conclusion
that they didn't want remote participation to happen, so it won't.
That's a shame.

If the only large, open project you've ever participated in is FreeBSD,
what gets done around here feels "normal" to you. But don't be so quick
to dismiss the viewpoints of people who have experience in the wider world.

Doug

-- 

    I am only one, but I am one.  I cannot do everything, but I can do
    something.  And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what
    I can do.
			-- Edward Everett Hale, (1822 - 1909)