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

Re: Fwd: Crush 2.0 abandoned -- Review and Feedback from Neil's Post of August 7th

Hello Everyone --

Again thanks to both of the list members who answered my earlier post.

To keep the discussions as clear and productive I suggest we limit it this weeks to comments, suggestions, etc. that address the points Neil raised in his most recent post. Here is my summary of those points:

  1. Future release of Crush 2.0 (not Crush) is now under review (no release date set)

  2. Organize efforts to resolve Crush 2.0 project issues that can be isolated and worked on separately (as Neil suggested); we need volunteers and plans to move ahead on them (with specifics) -- sounding off and signing on

  3. Discuss and strategize how to resolve the project issues with dependencies (internal and external) -- we need further breakdown of these issues and discussion by those with the interest and knowledge in those areas to come forward with specific recommendations

  4. Separately, at a later date, define the project leadership, organization, release roadmap and other political issues with as much participation and transparency as possible.
As far as formal project leadership, the direction we take is an open issue at the moment. At this point, assigning/electing a project 'czar' isn't as helpful as putting a priority action list  together along with a better scope and recommended solutions to Neil's list of items.

Some of you may feel otherwise on these issues, so please share them -- the floor is open for further debate. In the end however, we need people to organize and a plan. Whoever/whomever leads this project, it won't be the one man developer project it was previously, Neil made a compelling case against that approach.

Again, thanks to everyone and lets keep this moving forward by posting more specific answers that address Neil's list of development issues and challenges.

Prince

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:55:50PM +1000, Brendan Simon wrote:
I'd say identify (possibly "elect" at some stage) the leadership "team" that is given responsibility/authority to make executive decisions regarding emdebian Crush (and possibly all of emdebian).  This is likely to be a self selecting group.

I am confused: is "Crush 2.0" discussed here, or "Crush" in general?

Subject says "Crush 2.0 abandoned", not "Crush abandoned".

I do not see a need for elected leadership of Crush.  On the contrary: noone volunteering to do actual work but interest in leading (potential) work makes me worry if the project would then slide away from Debian.

The actual, concrete work needing to be done is some of it tied to deep knowledge about Debian packaging and build processes.  Some of it is not - but those parts is perhaps less interesting to work on.  Leadership won't change that.

What executive decisions is imagined relevant currently?

(as an example, deciding to not kill Crush 2.0 will not make Crush 2.0 magically appear)


Kind regards,


 - Jonas

--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJKgtyeAAoJECx8MUbBoAEhTOYQAIupv83pmE/lhCcEJpEdzR6R
Iw1UMWDn0G02GgTaD6AYYg0871mFbOAVcc2lYBuV64l2zbeKJ1bxbWT9zj2mvEYI
SebBw3cYriAsMhcD4ZzXSw9uWO6KlKWLH4IGwmxdJwFQqPoqByccIDg/Rv9WVHX7
C//NZq3mgzG92BwLm+Ek0ewm25OCo2Y0DG6Vri+pMDREVaNXWvLsLfAb48nW6Efu
d1FUQtcXnlp9RGO+kuCmalA2JjA7Su7yXtPaqeiAewr8OCb/XYl+TQDIfHcR2AV2
vHAWGh6oAESMCtiQXHjvCJUGW5TnRlULm8InvlPH1SFEIjAg8LkLMmA1BjCaAHqB
3Omir24Zu5NAtn1foks4rQyIXPZM0ViXyZKVBJXu0ybCCObAB8UT7lQVPcJIp07S
ByyGmA0QOAbOv3JuMAXtwwxZaeI9TG/8xaIYnw6vAjAX7QTmoJGYcc4TnUWmAmrr
TwIdWm5I+BBnZOXk37EODhcOJn1JXKMpNJIMdW0uz7EY/Ogq8Kwlj3wg8uP8E2db
YTlpE9sQ9UMB+FjBEE76JfgWdPMV5x3BezUfdvYoRtm6GEF/RqpXcwNMvsMEqokF
zn6po3wEdgaPiEQu8E0j0+dDYawvhW9wwFWl7JYWCI7ND/9XIrMSxzkpUhdrwaWQ
DkggfI3RErzfJVtayEAk
=nM89
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: