Healthy ASF Projects are neither leaderless nor headless. They are run by multiple heads -- individuals participating as peers -- converging on a consensus. Sometimes things may take longer than one person acting on their own, but it often means a better result, and it ensures that the project's lifespan is based upon its community, not an individual's participation. It is when this process breaks down that the PMC Chair needs to exercise its individual authority, ideally to help restore the proper collaborative state.
(Note to Nicola - I am just discussing for the sake of discussing. I can live with the current position :>)
I said in an e-mail some time back that I suspect we are are violently agreeing. I still believe that :>.
Your above point exactly matches my desire. I'm not looking for what I call "the accountable person" to drive and lead etc. in the normal course of events. The more they have to, the further we are from leaving incubation.
However, the 80/20 rule applies. In 80% of cases (I hope more :>), everything will work beautifully, the mentors will hardly ever get involved and all will be just peachy. The PPMC will drive everything and having had an accountable person will make absolutely no difference whatsoever.
It's the other 20% (and in this case I hope far lower) I worry about. In that case, I want someone like an identified mentor who can raise issues back to the Incubator PMC and who can and will guide the project back to the "collaborative state" as you so eloquently put it :>.
And by having that person clearly identified *prior* to problems occuring, they can get in there and just do it.
Cheers,
Berin
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
