On 29 April 2011 16:53, Mike Milinkovich <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It might help the contributors be more patient if they understood why it >> helps the OpenJDK community to wait for this. Neither the minutes from > the >> board meeting nor the ensuing discussion in the last twelve hours really >> explain why waiting indefinitely is better than letting OpenJDK 8 get >> started now. >> >> Put another way, what bad things might happen if it starts now? > > Mark, > > Good question, thanks. My apologies for a delayed response. > > I think the short answer is that Doug and I believe that governance matters. > We did think this through, and our judgment call at the time was the we > needed to push this governance creation process to completion, and the Java8 > project was some leverage to do so. It is certainly arguable whether we made > the right decision, but that is the explanation of why. >
Did it not seem appropriate to ask those working on the project first before stifling their work in this manner? This is exactly what governance should NOT be doing; preventing a FOSS project from being one by preventing people from working in the open. There's not much point in governance if your actions leave you with no-one to govern. -- Andrew :-) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37
