On 10/07/2016 08:40 PM, David Golden wrote:
[...] I do not think it would be right for me to try to be the
captain that steers us out of this mess.
Understood. As I've said before, if there are people inside or outside
the community that you think could continue to represent the "extreme
stability" point of view as part of future project governance, I think
it would benefit the community for you to see if they are interested in
such a role and to nominate/endorse them as a voice you respect in that way.
I believe that characterizing the direction of this project in the past
~4 years as "extreme stability" is extremely(ha!) unfair and misleading.
What I did was borderline common sense. What *maybe* sets me aside is
that I was able to devote more time to this goal, but that's about it.
Additionally stability on its own isn't tangible, nor does it yield a
final product. It is simply a mindset. When this mindset is not
represented in the group as a whole, it makes no difference whatsoever
whether a small part of said group is advocating it or not. My train of
thought should be familiar to you, I wrote the same when making my
(clearly failed) push for saner CPAN practices[1]:
This is not a simple feel-good undertaking, it does require a lot of buy-in,
and the buy-in has to come from within, from your own agreement that the
current status quo is unworkable going forward.
I currently do not know anyone within or outside the community who is
both driven by a strong "inner core" of sensible priorities *AND* would
be remotely interested in continuous sparing with mst over whether it is
ok to experiment on the wider userbase.
[1]
https://gist.github.com/ribasushi/74ce356123ede727e90f#file-2015-01-31-md
_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk
