 | NixOS Foundation | 450 Members |
| Public room for chatting with the NixOS Foundation Board | 112 Servers |
| NixOS Foundation | 450 Members |
| Public room for chatting with the NixOS Foundation Board | 112 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 27 Apr 2024 | ||
 vcunat | That would be a very radical change of philosophy. | 09:12:11 |
 Arian | I suggested a Verein with paid membership a few weeks ago in this chat. Got a lot of pushback on that :'). I'd suggest reading back the discussion . We discussed it quite much in detail | 09:12:25 |
 nat-418 | In reply to @vcunat:matrix.orgI am seeing good people leave the community every day. Seems like radical change may be needed. | 09:13:24 |
| nat-418 | In reply to @vcunat:matrix.org* I am seeing good people leave Nix every day. Seems like radical change may be needed. | 09:13:39 |
| vcunat | You think forcing them to pay would help? | 09:13:39 |
| nat-418 | In reply to @vcunat:matrix.orgIt's not "forced to pay", it's a way to support the project. | 09:14:02 |
| nat-418 | Codeberg community contributors dont have to be paying members of the eV. | 09:14:29 |
 Claes | I think membership with dues could help in two respects: provide financial support and define a constituency for democratic election of leaders, for example to the board. | 09:15:58 |
| Arian | I really urge people to just scroll up a bit. We had this exact discussion :') | 09:17:47 |
| Arian | (I know matrix is terrible for this. I'm sorry) | 09:18:12 |
| Claes | what is "a bit"? Not even sure what to look for. Was it yesterday, last week..? | 09:19:42 |
 leona | starting here i think: https://matrix.to/#/!CJXQiUGqNPcFonEdME:nixos.org/$iEMNQHMGfZPtq3VkND088BszG3V4hzr1SGRZ6GjGa_I?via=nixos.org&via=matrix.org&via=nixos.dev | 09:20:10 |
| Arian | In reply to @arianvp:matrix.orgHere the discussion starts | 09:21:26 |
| Claes | Ok so seems to be some legal hurdles. Still, I think at some point, if the non-commercial part of Nix is to grow, something like that is needed. Perhaps we are not there yet, but where I live even the local kids football club is organized like this. | 09:26:14 |
 Janik (they/them) | In reply to @arianvp:matrix.orghttps://github.com/NixOS/foundation/blob/master/role_and_responsibilities.md#role-of-the-board > Unblock things that would be stuck otherwise, and serve as: > - Arbiter in case of conflicts This was desperately needed with the sponsorship policy but didn't really happen. And if the board doesn't want to take that role that's fine, but then we need some other sort of governance body to do this. It's quite common for growing FOSS projects to introduce something like a governance board. | 09:32:23 |
 erincandescent joined the room. | 09:32:48 | |
| vcunat | To me conflict arbitration feels quite close to moderation. | 09:35:18 |
| vcunat | (but I'm not trying to imply anything about how to improve things) | 09:36:05 |
| nat-418 | nix as a whole needs to be able to come together and make decisions. a constellation of groups cannot do this. a registered voluntary association can. | 09:36:55 |
| nat-418 | * nix as a whole needs to be able to come together and make decisions. a notional constellation of groups cannot do this. a registered voluntary association can. | 09:37:36 |
 Jonas Chevalier | One thing that is criticised of the board is that we are not good at connecting with the community. I think it's true on some level. We are business people, trying to make business things happen. But that is also why the board is not a good arbiter for conflicts. It can do it, but it's a very heavy process for us. All of this is a bit of a DDoS for the limited bandwidth that we have. | 09:44:21 |
 @withoutwithin:matrix.org | yeah, it's like one of the worst possible situations for y'all | 09:44:43 |
| @withoutwithin:matrix.org | I feel for you | 09:44:53 |
| @withoutwithin:matrix.org | it's horrible that it's all came to this | 09:44:58 |
| Jonas Chevalier | I think this is growing pains | 09:45:05 |
 @theophane:hufschmitt.net | Re: a more structured governance for the community. This is something the board has discussed quite a bit in the past. In particular we've talked to a bunch of leaders from various other communies (from ones of similar size like Haskell or Plone up to very big ones like Apache and Eclipse) to get advice on the matter. One common theme amongst the bigger ones (who experienced that growth we have right now) is that structure is something that gets eventually unavoidable, but that having too much structure too early is as likely to kill the project – either by killing the spontaneity under bureaucracy, or by ending-up being ill-aligned with the community as it grows. | 09:58:58 |
| @theophane:hufschmitt.net | Hence the loose agreement on the anarchy-esque structure we've had so far | 09:59:53 |
| @theophane:hufschmitt.net | Maybe (evidently?) it's time to reconsider that | 10:00:20 |
| erincandescent | If the board wishes to just be a legal and fiscal vehicle - i.e. if it's members wish to be pure bureaucrats (and this is a very reasonable position to take; and indeed it's a job that needs going and is much appreciated), then it would be a good idea for it to explicitly delegate it's powers to a community function wherever possible, reserving just those it needs to explicitly protect itself; as opposed to the current situation where it is responsible for deciding every aspect of policy | 10:06:54 |
| erincandescent | * If the board wishes to just be a legal and fiscal vehicle - i.e. if it's members wish to be pure bureaucrats (and this is a very reasonable position to take; and indeed it's a job that needs going and is much appreciated), then perhaps it would be a good idea for it to explicitly delegate it's powers to a community function wherever possible, reserving just those it needs to explicitly protect itself; as opposed to the current situation where it is responsible for deciding every aspect of policy | 10:07:15 |