Re: [Openledger-developer] where is everyone?

[David P. <dp...@he...>]

On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 12:02 -0600, Joseph wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 10:36 -0700, David Pool wrote:
> > 
> > Hurdle 1 - Decision making
> > How do we decide on issues like archetecture and commit priviledges.
> > Sooner or later we'll have a conflict arise and without some process
> > for
> > deciding we're screwed. I'd propose that Klavs and two other people
> > form
> > an initial leadership team. I'd want most discussion and decision
> > making
> > to come from this list, but for tough decisions I'd want a clear
> > process
> > for reaching a decision
> 
> I'm not a developer (I could write instruction manual for the rest of
> us) but the best approach would be democratic one via voting between
> those who contribute.

"those who contribute" is too ambiguous for dealing with contentious
issues. I'd agree with the concept but suggest a model like Apache where
the initial team nominates and votes in people who have shown that they
are contributing to the project.

> If somebody is against one approach or another he/she should point the
> problem and suggest better solution.

This is the heart of open source and independent of having a decision
making group. Most issues should be hashed out on the Openledger-
developer list just as you suggest. If it comes down to two conflicting
patches against the core project there should be a decision making group
that can decide.

This group's functioning should be fair game for discussion. The SQL
Ledger leader's decision to squelch conversation about the direction of
that project is what brought me to Open Ledger. To me Free Software
implies Free Speech.

David