On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 05:10:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I do agree with Ian, however, that the tech-ctte is one of the worst
> examples for limiting hats for a slightly different reason: the tech-ctte
> needs to make decisions for the project that the project can then
> implement. Yes, this has been a weakness already, but one way in which
> that could be addressed is by having *more* tech-ctte members who are on
> core teams so that they can go make the resolution happen.
I have to say that the word that ultimately sprung to my mind after reading
this paragraph for the second time was - oligarchy. I know, I know, it's a
far stretch from reality, but still, the idea doesn't quite sound so
appealing if you look at it with that potential result in mind.
But, let's disregard that for a moment, and recall the earlier topic of a
perplexing issue that tech-ctte decided, the wordpress stable security
situation. If the tech-ctte which was deciding that had included someone who
was on the security team, and someone who was a maintainer of such PHP
applications, do you think that such a tech-ctte would have come to a better
decision? I'm not sure. I can't say that I would expect the existence of
either expert on the committee improve the odds that wordpress security bugs
would get handled differently a year later - we don't have any way of
expecting that these people would be active in that situation long after
the decision.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
