> Having a dragging conversation simply due to bundling reduces the ability for
> volunteers to participate
I'm sorry but having a 'dragging conversation' is entirely the point of a RFC.
It's not a rubber-stamping process, nor should it be. And this RFC
fundamentally changes the governance mode
@mbaret I want to apologize about my wording. Indeed constructive conversation
is important -- that is why we are having this conversation for about several
months now. I would like to point out the importance of unbundling -- i
removed my wording on dragging.
I do would like to point out the
> Imagine a case when a module is being needed by more than eight organizations
> -- many of them are industry players, but not all other members.
In such a situation, I would expect that with the combined resources of those
eight organizations, they could address any concerns raised by the comm
Thanks @mbaret. First of all, I have updated my original post and please read
it through again.
> In such a situation, I would expect that with the combined resources of those
> eight organizations, they could address any concerns raised by the community
> through the standard process. they'd
> First of all, I have updated my last post and please read it through again.
Extensively editing your reply after people reply to it creates a discussion
that's essentially impossible to follow. If you want to raise new points, and
in the interest of maintaining the public record of our discuss
> I'd appreciate a separate reply.
Here they are:
Thank you for laying out the personas. I agree with some of those
categorizations. I would like to point out however, that almost every one of us
in the community are wearing multiple hats. I personally contributed features,
maintained the mo
