Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Erik Hofman -- Wednesday 30 November 2005 09:56:
How could I tell others to postpone their contribution until after the
release of FlightGear 1.0 [...]
Good question, indeed! How could you? There was no discussion about
this topic on flightgear-devel before this order was announced, and
every discussion after that was passively suppressed by ignoring valid
arguments. How was this decision made and by whom? Is FlightGear no
longer "cooperative" (as in "working together")? Are we minor
developers now working for an elite that makes important decisions
off-list? This decisions making process sucks!
This is not to say that KLN89 needed to be in 1.0.0, but other
features urgently need to, unless 1.0.0 is meant to be a joke.
I don't want to passively supress your points, but I'm also afraid I
might say something less than helpful in response here.
By giving certain developers cvs write access, we are imparting a large
amount of trust. Trust that they will be careful and test what they
commit. Trust that they will do their best to act with the best
interests of the project in mind. But also that implies some amount of
autonomy ... within reasonable limits of course.
Don't forget that if a developer does commit something that turns out to
be a *really* bad idea, we have peer pressure, advanced shaming
techniques, ridicule, and the ability to back things out of cvs.
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson http://www.flightgear.org/~curt
HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/
FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org
Unique text: 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
