Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > If there are still open problems, the best thing would > be to communicate them as clearly as possible. If James Troup and Ryan Murray have made one thing abundantly clear, it is this: as a general rule, they will not communicate. Not clearly, not consistently, not but rarely, not with the Project at large. James is not evil, nor presumably is the mysterious Ryan. They probably have their reasons. The infrastructure people who *do* communicate---Steve Langasek, A.J. Towns and Joerg Jaspert particularly come to mind---appear to value James' and Ryan's collaboration. Nevertheless, suggesting that James and Ryan themselves communicate is obviously a non-starter. How many years have we been suggesting this? Continuing to debate among ourselves how we wish James and Ryan would communicate is demeaning to us and, presumably, irritating to them. It stirs up loyal friends like Wouter Verhelst and accomplishes nothing. Unless James unexpectedly meets a vision of light on the road to Debian Damascus and mends his ways, the reality appears to be as follows. 1. Debian's infrastructure largely works rather well, probably in significant part because of the long volunteer hours James (and presumably the mysterious Ryan) devote to it. 2. Where Debian's infrastructure fails, we who want it fixed are required to play by James' rules: we must either work circumspectly through James' trusted lieutenants; or we must spend hundreds of hours hacking dak or whatever, proving our worthiness in the hope that James will someday let us join the Imperium's inner circle. 3. If James' imperial rules are unacceptable to us, then the alternative is to change the person in James' position. It has been years since any other option was credible. We all know this. This means dismissing James from his fortified posts of Project power---and accepting the potential consequences of converting a powerful James from a difficult friend to a difficult foe. I am just one insignificant DD. I do not flatter myself that my opinion counts for much (especially given my zero willingness to take over any of James' duties myself, and my zero credibility to do so, even were I willing). Nevertheless such as it is, I personally feel that despite good intentions James became a net liability to the Project years ago, and that the only good reason to retain him is that my hero Steve Langasek---who probably will spank me for writing these words---seems to want him. I really, really do not want to lose Steve, who is a bigger positive than James is a negative. Otherwise, the time had come for James to go, and the way to make him go were simply to thank him (sincerely) for his long service, to demand from him the relevant Project root passwords, and to dismiss him from his posts. And if, hypothetically, James would not peaceably turn over the root passwords? Aye, that's always the risk one runs in such revolutions, isn't it? That would hurt. Yet the very prospect of the danger is itself the sign that James has too much power. Still, even now, could James not change for the better? Probably, yes, he could. But after all these years the likelihood that he will is small, and at some point our continuing to beg him to change only unmasks us as fools. James is our J. Edgar Hoover: he is in some ways a good influence and in other ways a bad, but he does not want to change and he does not want to go, and you and I are going to have to face these facts. It has long been evident that further discussion with James on the matter is futile. Tolerate him, or dismiss him and face the the consequences; these are our choices. Your view may vary. Since I am not in the Imperium's inner circle, it would not surprise me if I had some of the details wrong, so detailed correction is welcome; but I think that the broad strokes of this post are right in any case. Perhaps you will agree. Thanks for reading. -- Thaddeus H. Black 508 Nellie's Cave Road Blacksburg, Virginia 24060, USA +1 540 961 0920, t@b-tk.org, thb@debian.org [My preference is that this post not be reported in the DWN.]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature