> I disagree completely. Free software projects don't work that way. On the contrary Charlie. Show me a major GPL project that doesn't have some type of leadership in place. I think we're getting a little hung up here on semantics -- dictatorship vs structure.
> There aren't 437 device drivers in the 2.6 linux kernel because Linus > directed a bunch of people to write them - they're there because a whole > bunch of people had hardware that they wanted to get working. Apples and oranges. The linux kernel wouldn't be in existence today(IMO) if the kernel development team didn't have some type of leadership in place. Can you imagine how screwed up things would be if you had a green horn c-programmer committing code changes to the kernal cvs tree... Perl is another example. Did development chaos result in the birth of a language? Is perl 6 the result of developers all over the world working independently of one another? What about Apache, Samba, Mysql, KDE, etc., etc? Do each of these remain successful because of the lack of leadership? GPL: Structure is a good thing. Dictatorship is a bad thing. There is definitely a difference. > Find something that you'd like to see happen and make it happen, YES! That is GPL in action my friend! However, like a laser beam, unless the energy is focused in a common direction, the effort MAY be of little value to the end cause. In the same way, if everyone in this community takes off in different directions, it doesn't matter how much they get done because we haven't really gone anywhere. -- Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Searchable archive at http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
