On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:04:00AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > In a sense, of course, this is true. However, what I'm trying to point > out is that we have a fundamental governance question facing us here. > What are we, as a project, going to do when we face a decision where the > project is strongly divided and all sides consider the opposing decision > to be a disaster?
What ever happened to letting the system evolve naturally? Rather than force change on the users, let the quality and utility of the software the user *wants* to run manage the timetable to change the foundational elements of the system. Change from the status quo should be done when there is a compelling reason to do so - and then with great care and consideration of the consequences. Yes, this approach leads to painfully slow transitions sometimes. If you are really concerned about the speed of change implementation, you probably shouldn't be working on an open-source collaborative project founded on the bazaar model. Pat -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141113185852.gc16...@flying-gecko.net
