The current widespread model is that a project maintains a stable distribution (Gold) and an unstable distribution (silver). Silver changes are proposed using diff-Naur patches. Silver commits are done by a very limited number of people (usually one).
Every other project I'm associated currently associated with, every other project I've worked on large (Fedora) or small (Common Lisp Library) uses the same model. Even super-large projects like Linux and Firefox use this model. GCL, for instance, uses this model. Camm has recently made changes on the ANSI branch which are distinctly non-ansi (e.g. *safety-level* 4) and this raises no comment. Up until November of 2006 I was publishing Axiom Gold releases on a best-effort, two-month schedule using the same model. It worked perfectly well to get us up to the last Gold. Please explain why you think Axiom should be a democratic model. Please explain why you feel, as a self-declared algebra developer, you have a need to vote on machinery (gclweb.lisp) below the algebra which enables function you will never use. Tim _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
