On Oct 30, 2012, at 3:58 PM, Michael Klishin wrote: > 2012/10/31 Andy Fingerhut <andy.finger...@gmail.com> > I don't think the idea of the discussion is to go by majority vote > > It's not about making decisions by majority vote, Andy. It is about > making sure many members of the community can *participate* or even > simple be aware of important discussions. > > Most people don't follow clojure-dev because you can't subscribe to it the > usual way. > > Discussing the issue of the contribution process being an unnecessary pain > in a small group of people who have already gone through the process does not > make any sense to me.
The discussion may have arisen because the contribution process is a pain for many, but that is not what it is _about_. It is hopefully more productive than that. It is to try to find a process that is less of a pain and is acceptable to Clojure/core. I should have said in my previous message, but feel free to suggest all the ideas you want for alternate processes. If one of them is considered better than all of the suggestions made so far, and/or you are willing to hire a lawyer to help legally vet a new process, I think your voice would be sampled with an extremely heavy bias :-) Andy -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
