[oe] [Angstrom-devel] Angstrom Core Team

[Matthias Hentges]

Am Montag, den 23.07.2007, 22:38 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> Hi Guys,
> 
> As people will note, Laibsch (Rolf) has been frustrated by politics and
> personalities getting in the way of development and this is *bad*. I
> don't think anyone wants this.

[...]
      * 
> Whilst I can't really call myself an Angstrom developer exactly, I do
> have a vested interest in seeing it become a success. Why is Angstrom
> important? Most of the other handheld distributions in OpenEmbedded were
> lining themselves up to work under the Angstrom banner. Familiar and
> OpenZaurus are dead projects and all hopes for handhelds support from OE
> now rest on Angstrom's shoulders. OE therefore has a vested interest in
> Angstrom and this is one reason I want to see it succeed. I also think
> it has massive potential if done correctly.

ACK

> What I don't want is anyone feeling the need for yet-another-distro
> which would be the next step is Angstrom's leadership cannot be made
> clear. This leads to fragmentation which is bad.

Agreed, the developer resources are already spread thin. Forking (or
semi-forks as in "include angstrom.conf ; OVERRIDE_THE_HELL_OUT_OF_IT)
would possibly (but not necessarily!) spread them even thinner. 

> So who should be on the core team? My thoughts are that Koen is an
> obvious candidate. 
> I'd propose Marcin/hrw (experience from OZ),
> Graeme/XorA (developer/user) and Rod Whitby/rwhitby (to represent the
> other non handhelds that Angstrom supports). I'd also propose inviting
> Rolf/laibsch if he does consider coming back to the project.

Excellent choice, but you of course forgot Dr. Mickey ;)

> Membership of the core team probably doesn't involve too much work, you
> just need to care about the project, be involved with it in some way and
> be prepared to make decisions now and again and make sure the project
> agrees on a direction.
> 
> Thoughts, comments, suggestions and alternatives welcome.

The committee should meet on a regular schedule via IRC or alternatively
via a mailing list and discuss concerns at hand. If members can not
agree on a certain outcome, the majority vote decides and all members
accept the decision derived from that vote.

This should defuse the current situation quite a bit as there will be no
more flame-wars on the ML about "secret" talks, etc.

If you are on the core-team, you _will_ get to vote and express your
opinion on important matters and nobody will feel "left out".

> I do think Angstrom needs some kind of formalised leadership though.

I guess on this we can all agree.

-- 
Matthias 'CoreDump' Hentges 
Cologne / Germany

Webmaster of Hentges.net & Embedded Linux Developer
GPG ->  gpg --keyserver gpg-keyserver.de --recv-keys 0xAF3030D9

My OS: Debian SID: Geek by Nature, Linux by Choice