[forum] A Call For Open Governance Of X Development

[Keith Packard]

Around 0 o'clock on Mar 22, "Rich Murphey" wrote:

> 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.

I wasn't prepared to state my views at that point.  I've now stated them as
you requested.  The issues I raised are:

    * Limited development resources
    * Slow release schedules
    * Lack of cooperation with other projects
    * Opacity of development processes

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

People interested in exploring the system without being able to qualify 
for membership now have access to what was formerly closed information.
That, and the membership process was not as responsive as people desired, 
the granting of membership would often take months.  This, of course, is 
natural in a system which requires human intervention by volunteers and I 
don't fault those responsible for processing membership applications, I 
fault only the necessity of getting membership for access to CVS.

In addition, the open CVS repository has been invaluable to the user 
community as releases are often a year apart and releases of necessity lag 
hardware deployment.

> 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.

The issues I see within XFree86 are based on a lack of cooperation between
the management and the wider community.  Some open source projects work
fine without formal governance.  Those projects are still characterized by
a willingness of leadership to listen and respond to requests for changes
from the community, something which I argue has not been as prevalent in
XFree86 as it should be.

If the leadership of the project isn't able to listen and act on the advice
of the community because of a lack of resources or interest, then perhaps
new leadership should be brought into place, ideally at the request of the
current leadership.

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

Current XFree86 governance is not a precise mirror of current commitment to
the window system.  Most of the current board of directors have not been
involved in the window system for years.  If you feel that the core team is
responsible for governance, then even within that body there are many
members who have greatly contributed in the past, but who have moved on to
other interests.  I feel it is the responsibility of those who are no 
longer involved in the window system to abdicate their authority.

One way of generating a governing body more representative of the wider 
community is by asking for the community's opinion about the developers, 
other projects have found that a useful way of gauging current interest 
and community support.  Whether this would be the right way to choose 
leadership within XFree86 is a secondary question, but it is what I 
suggested.

> 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.

None of the issues I've raised question the technical direction of the 
project, nor do they have any impact on technical decisions.  I am 
concerned only with the governance of the project and the interactions of 
the government with the community.

Again, I ask the core team and board members to consider changing the
governance of XFree86 to meet the needs of the X community.

-keith