Rich Freeman wrote: > >> Nor should Gentoo projects suddenly change what they are because > >> "the internet" doesn't understand them. That's a ridiculous basis > >> for any change. > > > > It doesn't always matter what others think, but it is always worth > > considering. It matters a lot for how one is understood. > > Sure, but what's the alternative? GLEP-39 was written precisely > because a more top-down system wasn't really working well.
I'm thinking that perhaps sunrise projects could be useful. It would be up to each developer if they choose to start their project as a "normal" project, or as a sunrise project. It could just as well be called bootstrap or experimental or one of many other fine names. There would not be much difference between the two, other than perhaps that they are hosted in different places to more clearly communicate intent of the developers who work on the project. It would also be up to developers if they want to move their project between the two "types". > The new model is much more bazar-like, with the Council as a forum > for appeal if things get out of hand. They could make recommendations about where new projects should probably start, but developers could still be free to choose the other type. > If once in a while we have to deal with the fallout of something > like this I'll take that any day if it makes it more likely for the > next X32/Prefix/etc to take off on Gentoo. I don't think it's strictly neccessary to accept fallout from misunderstandings just to have room for innovation. //Peter
