Developments on the Ubuntu governance

Scott Kitterman ubuntu at kitterman.com
Mon Nov 17 19:38:14 UTC 2014


On Monday, November 17, 2014 12:44:26 PM Ian Weisser wrote:
> On Monday, November 17, 2014 11:27 AM I wrote:
> >> My preferred solution is to address the underlying problem. This
> >> isn't a problem we can throw a team at for a cycle or two. It's an
> >> element of the culture within our community, a holdover from Ubuntu's
> >> technocratic roots during the first few years.
> 
> On Monday, November 17, 2014 12:36 PM Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >I've been following this thread and you lost me here.  What's your view
> >
> > of the underlying problem?
> 
> The cause (not problem) I see: The Ubuntu community equates technical
> prowess with leadership. But they are two different skill sets.
> 
> Totally understandable, from Ubuntu's start with a small group of
> technical experts working for a technical expert on a set of technical
> issues.
> 
> The Ubuntu community is NOT a Technocracy. We merely have some cultural
> baggage left over from those early days. Cultural, not organizational,
> not deliberate. NOT DELIBERATE! And, frankly, changing that cultural
> perception my be more difficult than it's worth.
> 
> A first-order effect of the cause is that we have some very skilled and
> capable technical people running teams and projects. Good! The result
> isn't a problem; that's what they should be doing.
> 
> A second-order effect of the cause is that the team/project orientation
> may tend to focus on production or operation...the technical aspect. The
> team/project has trouble finding new (appropriately-skilled) volunteers,
> while under-skilled volunteers can't find a point of entry into the
> project.
> 
> The second-order effect is totally understandable in this cultural
> context. But it's still a failure.
> 
> A third-order effect is that new participants get annoyed and create a
> screencasts to share with other new participants.
> 
> Svetlana was discussing the third-order effect.
> I was discussing the second-order effect, which I called the 'underlying
> problem'.
> I want to keep the first-order effect, so am unwilling to address the
> cultural cause.
> 
> My preferred solution is to: Equip community leaders with leadership and
> management skills so they are prepared to attract, welcome, train,
> develop, listen, delegate, mentor, negotiate, compromise, and retain new
> participants into the gurus and leaders of the future.
> 
> In other words, I don't want to chuck anybody out shake anything up - I
> want to make team/project tasks easier for them by adding appropriately
> to their toolbox. I think that addressing that second-order effect
> 
> Er, I hope that's a bit more clear.

It is.  Thanks.

I think it's not a technocracy, it's a do-ocracy.  Those who do (mostly) 
decide.  For technical topics, that generally means technical people.  It may 
appear that it is inevitable then that leadership and technical savvy will be 
conflated, but I don't think that's the case.

I've been an Ubuntu user for about 7 years and a developer for more than 6 of 
those years.  When I started, I wasn't that technically capable, but I 
learned, so I've been on the other end of this.

Community leaders don't become leaders solely on their technical skills nor on 
their position in the governance process.  In Kubuntu there are other 
developers that are far more knowledgeable than I am, but I'm still able to 
lead and help get things done.  I didn't get more say in the flavor when I was 
elected to the Kubuntu Council (if anything it's less as I feel some 
obligation to remain a bit detached from issues to be a neutral decider if 
there are conflicts that need resolving).

If so called leaders aren't credible to people doing the work, then people 
will simply ignore them.  Credible isn't just about technical skills though, 
it's about talking to people and getting results too.

In Kubuntu, we very carefully divided roles and responsibilities between the 
Kubuntu Council and Kubuntu Developers as a group so that non-developers could 
participate on the KC on an equal footing and we have generally (maybe always) 
had one or more developers as a member.

The challenge we do have is trying to remember what it was like at the start.  
There is no way I can write documentation for beginners.  I lack the necessary 
perspective.

I like the idea of someone who is at or near the beginning of their Ubuntu 
contribution journey making videos to show people how to do various tasks to 
get started.  

I guarantee you if someone shows up in #kubuntu-devel and says they use 
Kubuntu and want to help out with development, we'll be glad to help them as 
long as they are willing to be patient and have some self motivation.

Other parts of the project have enough manpower troubles that it's more 
difficult.  We used to have a vibrant MOTU culture that was very open (and in 
fact the primary entry point) for people that wanted to start out in Ubuntu 
development.  Ever since Canonical tried to disband MOTU (and almost 
succeeded), the few that remain active just haven't been that effective at 
recruiting.

I hope that additional perspective helps,

Scott K



More information about the Ubuntu-community-team mailing list