On 8/15/06, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip/> If a individual doesn't like the method the project is communicating with then it is up to him to convince the rest of the community/project to change.
It's not necessarily a question of 'like'. Even if someone likes IRC, they may not have access to it from their work environment, or they may not be able to spend time at their day job chatting about their favourite open source project. <snip/> (I'm going to get flamed here)
this clinging to email is probably a symptom of a bigger problem. Trust. People don't trust other members to make a decision, and always want to add their 2c's because they are smart people and have their own insights and they know what's best. and want to feel that they are needed or something. This consensus-based approach we have adopted is a drag. I don't believe we should wait 48 hours so everyone has a chance to weigh in.. I'd much rather have a quorum based approach X members say +1 and it's a done deal.
Maybe it's just me, but that's not the way I see it at all. Absolutely, I trust the other committers on the projects I work on. But that doesn't mean I believe that they're always right. I would *much* prefer to have a chance to express my opinions before a decision is made, than come along "late to the party" and find myself vetoing something because I strongly believed that the wrong decision had been made. (Not that I believe I'm always right either!) And as for our concensus-based approach, well, I see that as a large part of who we are. Give that up and the ASF isn't the same ASF any more. get a better job? I just did. ;-) And that I don't have day-time access to IRC doesn't make it a worse job, either. I just have to consider day-job-time to be a non-IRC "timezone". -- Martin Cooper
