gmlistbox at obsethryl.eu
Sun Dec 30 10:41:57 PST 2007
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Hey All,
Greetings, with some delay.
> Just a quick note to say hello and respond to some recent concerns about
> the inactivity of LFS projects.
It would come as of no surprise, especially to you.
> For me, as I'm sure is the case for several others, several things in my
> personal life have taken up nearly all my time lately. LFS gets pushed
> into the background.
> I think we'd all agree, especially since we don't get paid for our work,
> that work at LFS is completely voluntary. Even so, we work hard to
> create a solid, stable product that in many ways reaches towards the
> level of 'Professional', and that is exactly where we want it to be.
Agreed, but that is the way F/LOSS works, most of the time. And since the
time dedicated to this is detracted from personal spare time, there is a
huge list of reasons why you have to respect everybody's time and good
> Unfortunately, to keep LFS there, there needs to be enough time and
> energy devoted to it. For me, that simply won't happen anymore unless I
> can properly schedule my time to allow for LFS and reserve space for it
> - space that I know I *will* use for development of LFS.
There are several, more competitive and unfortunately for you, extremely
more competent projects. Cross-LFS and DIY-Linux are an example, and they
are far from being just "forks" right now. It is also of interest of how
feelings between the three communities *are* right now. I also know that
there was an attempt by you to create LeafOS, which would have been yet
another fork, initially. And it has stopped because of the same reasons why
LFS is facing its own problems for some time now.
> To that end, I wonder if it would be at all useful to anyone else to
> create a publicly shared Calendar that would show, among other things,
> when each of the devs are scheduled to work on the various projects? Not
> that anything would be set in stone - but at least it might give
> everyone an idea of who is doing what and when, and perhaps move all of
> us to be more regular in development?
> Any Thoughts?
A shared calendar...
You would require a greater number of people to join the project, people who
are to often *disagree* with the people in management right now and do not
appreciate the kind of public relations that seemingly hold LFS together,
just like they do not particularly enjoy having plausible concerns
regarding *plagiarism* done on the conscious and deliberate level, from
time to time.
The fact that LFS broke into several other projects that took a life of
their own has nothing to do with the fact that you wish to follow the
pedantic route, and offer something fun to learn from. Fun is irrelevant in
this particular case, for if that was the case, a simple tutorial on a
static page would have been more than sufficient. It has to do with the
intricate web of politics surrounding the LFS and that have been the cause
for its fall from grace, for some of its past users at least.
It should be of no wonder that most users do not choose to adopt LFS
anymore, despite of how they feel about it. Historically, it may have its
place, but right now it seems to only backport features from cross-LFS and
diy-linux, without the necessary accompanying *credit*.
F/LOSS, among other things, works on a credit basis.
Therefore, if you need a calendar, here is task one: How to enlarge user and
developer base, the right way.
Personally, I think that some people, you included, actually have a very
particular agenda on how things should be done and who is not invited into
the party; therefore, it might be ill - advised to ask for opinions you are
not to accept, a priori. Not to mention illogical.
Use the proper credit system, find somebody to stand for the unity of your
project, accept reality: various projects like diy-linux and cross-lfs took
form because the arguments presented were valid but the "fathering"
community would not accept them. People who wanted to contribute, started
moving away. This is your major problem. It is not a contribution problem,
but it is an attribution and management problem.
LFS cannot continue to exist simply because it ports the work of other
projects into it, like it does with cross-lfs and diy-linux. It should have
enough reasons to survive on its own.
In a few words: Work on making others trust you, because that is of no
marginal relevance at all. Strife and flashy, order - like announcements,
do not contribute to progress, at all.
This is from someone who has had a great respect for this project. Do not
Enjoy your holidays and good luck.
More information about the alfs-discuss