My point is simply this: The lack of a clear formal process for feature requests leads to this degradation in the conversation. Without a formalized structure, the conversation devolves rapidly into an argument over semantics and word choice. It is not my contention that the "core" developers need to be different in any way. It is also not my contention that the users need to be different in any way. It is my contention that the "process" currently generates more ill will than it needs to, and needs to be replaced. The problem is a systemic one. There needs to be a more formal structure put in place than just the -hackers mailing list. There needs to be a way to evaluate the demand for a specific feature as well as the benefits and the effort it will require. It needs to be done in as neutral a way as possible. In order to be effective, it will have to be driven into being by the developers, because they will be the ones who can hamstring it -- not the users.

Or we can just keep bickering among ourselves over semantics and word choice. That seems to be fun for everyone so far.

Sean


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to