Re: The Problem Of Governance (or lack thereof)

On 1/21/24 11:28, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> Core is not the "Board of Directors", who makes all the hard
> decisions, and everybody else shuts up and codes in the direction
> they are told to.
>
> Core is more of a "General Secretary" function, who's job it is to
> keep the meeting in order, provide paper, pencils and refreshments,
> and diplomatically try to facilitate the delegates reaching some kind
> of consensus, or if they cannot, to credibly count the votes.

This does not make any sense. Official FreeBSD website says it is

 > The FreeBSD Core Team constitutes the project’s  *Board of Directors",
 > responsible for deciding the project’s overall goals and direction*

https://www.freebsd.org/administration/#t-core

Most recent status report says:
 > The FreeBSD Core Team is the governing body of FreeBSD.

https://www.freebsd.org/status/report-2023-07-2023-09/#_freebsd_core_team


I find it very confusing. A former core team member and a prominent 
member of the community openly denies the
documented purpose of the elected team. The core itself remains silent. 
Who to believe?

If the core is serving a secretary function - why are we electing 
secretaries?
More importantly - who is responsible for governance then?

This is a repeated pattern - the community looks up to the core for 
leadership, but the core team stays in the shadows or denies it's 
responsibilities. This is not a sign of a health community, and I am 
saying this with huge love towards the project and the community.

We need to do better than this.

-- 

Ihor Antonov