[forum] A Call For Open Governance Of X Development

[Rich Murphey]

Keith Packard writes:

> I have made limited progress in my attempts to address these 
> issues. 

That's because you didn't raise any issues to the core team.  Even when 
asked what the issues were, you didn't raise any.

> The opening of the XFree86 CVS repository and 
> developer mailing lists to public access has benefitted X 
> development significantly. In order to improve the technical 
> coordination with other open source projects, I have become 
> personally involved in many of them.

How has open access to CVS and mailing lists been helpful
to XFree86 developers?

Surely it has been helpful to vendors.

> Within the last couple of months I have come to understand 
> why these persistent problems have not been solved by the X 
> community. By X community, I mean:
> 
>     * Developers working on the X server and libraries.
>     * Developers working on ancillary X extensions and 
> services such as
>       the DRI and GATOS projects.
>     * Developers working on Qt, Gtk+, Fltk, Tk, Motif and 
> other toolkits.
>     * Application developers using either Xlib or an X toolkit.
>     * System integrators and distributors packaging X technology in
>       various forms.
>     * Consulting companies selling services based on X.
>     * Hardware vendors producing hardware to work with X.
>     * X End users.
> 
> The key issue is that XFree86 is not a community-governed project.

You seem to have an obsession with governing, leading,
the will of the community and democracy.

Why are any of these critical to development success?  They
have nothing to do with what motivates open-source developers.

XFree86 is governed by those who have made a long-standing
investment of code, time and effort.

> XFree86 processes and procedures originate with the Directors 
> of the XFree86 Corporation. Technical leadership of the 
> XFree86 project has traditionally been provided by the 
> XFree86 Core Team, an informal association of leading XFree86 
> developers.

You know what?  Incorporating was the biggest waste of effort
XFree86 has ever expended.  It was done to satisfy the X
Consortium.  We couldn't get membership in XC in order
to collaborate with them unless were were a corporate entitiy.

So, we incorporated, and what did it achieve?  Nothing.  Nada.

We were stonewalled by the XC for many years, and by you
and Jim specifically.  Incorporating has never been an
enabler of anything unique for XFree86.

That's why the BOD has so little to do.  I have no idea
where you get these ideas about what the board does.  It's
certainly news to the board members.

You make grand statements about the importance and
influence of the XFree86 board and how they exclude others.
How you have come to this conclusion absolutely baffles me.

The board is nothing more or less than senior core people.

Had you been a team player and stayed on the project for a
few years, you'd be there.  There's no other way to get
there and you have no worse or better a chance than anyone
else.

> While the XFree86 Board of Directors is nominally in charge 
> of XFree86, they have absented themselves from governing the 
> project and left that to the XFree86 Core Team. The community 
> is left wondering who is actually in charge of XFree86. 

The BOD has very little to do.  In that sense you are correct.

Core has very much to do, and as all-volunteer developers
they pretty much decide whatever they do themselves.  There
is a remarkable degree of consensus, in part because there
is no one imposing a direction or mandate on them.


> As a 
> result, community trust in XFree86 leadership has suffered. 
> Decisions appear to be arbitrary and are not seen to reflect 
> the will of the community. 

XFree86 has served the community for many years.  It has served
the open source platforms far more than the X Consortium did.
Did you complain about trust in the X Consortium?

What does the will of the community have to do with any of this?
Did Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD or any others spring forth
from the will of the community?  No.  They were the result
of developer's desires to experiment, create and 
build tools for themselves.

Developers are responsible for bringing these projects to
the community, and the great thing about open source is
that developers have total control over their direction
and progress.


> The leadership has no 
> accountability to the community: thus community members have 
> no ability to change project direction and the Board has 
> little incentive to do so. In addition, the lack of clear 
> formal policies has made it difficult to resolve disputes 
> when the usual consensus breaks down.

The developers are the leaders.  And yes, they have no
accountability to you because they are volunteers.  They
code whatever they damn well please when the want to.  

I wish you luck in holding everyone accountable to the
will of the community and imposing formal policies on everyone.
I can imagine how many developers that will attract.

> It is therefore essential for the community to be involved in 
> the governance of X development. Two key elements in a 
> community-governed project are:
> 
>    1. A low barrier to become a voting member.
>    2. Regular elections of the government by all of the members.

Good luck with this.  It's certainly not how most of the open
source projects came into being.  

It's hard enough to impose the will of a seasoned architect on
a developer.  Why you think a developer will code to the will
of public opinion is beyond me.

> Community governed projects such as Gnome, KDE and Debian 
> have well-established membership policies. All allow anyone 
> with the interest and ability to join and vote. As far as I 
> know, only the XFree86 Board members are voting members of 
> XFree86. Community governed projects elect officials who 
> serve for a few years, after which elections must be held. To 
> my knowledge, XFree86 has never held an election.

What is the issue, and what does this solve?

> The XFree86 corporate bylaws indicate that any change in 
> XFree86 governance must be initiated by the current Directors 
> of the XFree86 Corporation. (The XFree86 bylaws are no longer 
> publicly available: a previous public version 
> <http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:6ulnwYz58ZAC:www.xfree86
> .org/legal/by_laws.html>
> can be found in the Google cache.) The bylaws state that 
> there are two classes of Members in XFree86, Full (Voting) 
> Members and Associate
> (non-Voting) Members.
> 
>     2.2 A Full Member shall be admitted to Membership by (a) 
> acceptance
>     of such persons or entity's written application for such 
> Membership
>     by the affirmative majority vote of the Board of Directors of the
>     Corporation ... 
> 
>     2.21 The criteria for admission as an Associate Member and
>     Membership fees and dues for any other membership shall be as
>     determined from time to time by the Board of Directors. 
> 
> As far as I know, there are no Full Members other than the 
> Board members. The bylaws also state that voting is supposed 
> to occur at the annual meeting of the Members.
> 
>     3.2 Annual meetings of Members shall be held on the 
> fourth Monday in
>     February each year ... at which meeting Voting Members shall elect
>     in accordance with Section 4.3, a Board of Directors ... 
> 
> As far as I am aware, no annual meeting has taken place in 
> the last three years. XFree86 has the trappings of democracy, 
> but the community has no voting rights and no elections are held.

XFree86 sets direction by consensus of developers, not 
by vote.  Core simply never feels the need to vote on anything.
Core team members set their own direction and the team sets
it's direction by consensus.

> There are many ways to move from our current position to one 
> of community control, but for XFree86 to make the transition, 
> the current Board of Directors must have a desire to do so. I 
> encourage the X community to support a community government 
> for X development and hope the XFree86 Board will adopt this model.
> 
> I believe that community governance will enable the X 
> community to address both the problems described earlier and 
> future problems as they arise. I look forward to working 
> within the X community in the coming years to enhance the 
> capabilities of the X Window System.
> 
> Keith Packard
> March 21, 2003

Good luck with these ideas for governing developers.

Sounds like fun.  Not.

Rich