[kde-artists] The need for management

Yes, even though this is an Open Source Software project, we need 
management.  Especially with KDE (and any other similar projects) 
because it has become too large to be managed by constructive anarchy.

DA said:

> "Stepping on toes" is an inevitable consequence of doing work within KDE, in 
> my opinion.

WRONG, anyone that thinks that way needs to rethink their position.

Now, I don't mean that we won't have disagreement.  We should have 
disagreements.  Engineers argue (somewhat vehemently) about how do do 
things.  The problem I see with the WallPaper issue is that the argument 
is getting personal and that it is occurring after the action was taken.

True arguments should alway be about the issue.  I brought up an issue 
on another list a while ago and I thought I was the target of a tag-team 
rhetoric and insult gang.  This could be used as a textbook example of 
how NOT to argue.

So, arguments should stick to the issue.  Also, they should occur before 
an issue is decided.

But, getting back to management.  In business, people think that 
management means other people telling you what to do.  That isn't really 
the case.  Management determines the process of how decisions are made. 
  And, I note that in any organization, after decisions are made that 
everyone needs to abide by them.

DA told me:

> If every single thing that I did needed to be discussed by some slow mailing 
> list for days, and by disinterested persons, I wouldn't get anything done. 
> So, I use my judgement, discuss potentially controvertial changes with others 
> ard wait for your disagreement mail  :) 

Perhaps this explains his problem with stepping on toes. :-D

Obviously, this attitude is not compatible with any system of management.

We need to develop a management system for KDE since the project has 
grown too large to continue without one.  Exactly what our management 
system should be is something that needs to be developed.

I do have some suggestions. (1) A discussion on IRC is probably a good 
idea but, I don't think that final decisions should be made there. (2) 
Before a change is implemented, a RFC posting should be made to the 
appropriate list and should be CCed to the maintainer.  How, long to 
wait and what to do if there is no response (or no maintainer) is an 
open question (3) Obviously, with an OSS project, a manager (a 
maintainer?) isn't there to make policy, but they are there to determine 
policy by whatever method and when policy is determined it should be 
recored and others should follow it. (4) Businesses have a policy manual 
so that everyone can determine what policy is.  It appears from the 
WallPaper issue that we need an equivalent on the web -- a policy WiKi 
perhaps.

Clearly this needs a lot of discussion.  This is supposed to be a 
collaborative project of peers.  But, we still need some structure -- 
even an absolute democracy has a structure.  And the operation of this 
structure may not not be easy -- be likened to herding cats.

--

-- 
JRT
______________________________________________________________________________
kde-artists <at> kde.org |  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists