Re: Foundation summary

Mike Kestner <> writes:

> Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > The steering committee IMO has done a lot of good to improve
> > communication and coordination. The foundation's board won't be any
> > better than the steering committee, but it will be elected, which will
> > hopefully make people feel a lot better about it.
> Who are these people who need to feel better, and why are they whining
> about direction being set by some of the core contributors of the
> project?  

Are you saying then, that you think the current steering committee is
OK and could continue in perpetuity for all you care, but a foundation
would be bad? I can't speak for the other members of the steering
committee, but I know that personally I would feel better about
representing GNOME to outsiders and trying to organize the project if
I were part of a group chosen specifically by the hackers, rather than
essenitally self-appointed. (Not that I know if I would even want to
be on the foundation board at this point.) I strongly suspect some
other steercom members feel the same way, and I don't think very many
of them feel the opposite.

It's possible that our desire to feel more legitimate about our
authority is entirely self-serving, but I think rather that we are
channeling a sense of discomfort felt by a lot of the community.

I understand your desire to avoid beaurocracy - I don't think any of
us want that, really. Mainly what we are trying to do is formalize
more or less what we have been doing already, and make it more open.

 - Maciej

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]