So I think one of the assumptions you're making is that it's good to
agree on priorities.

I think I disagree with that assumption.  I think we do need to have
agreement on the high-level goals of the project, but I think it's
actually good to disagree over which aspects of it are higher
priority.  That people within an open-source project disagree over
priorities is one of the things that lets open-source software have
higher overall quality than closed-source software.

This is because there are tons of different things that affect the
quality of software, and different users care about different ones.
We need to worry about getting behavior correct, having clear user
interface, being fast, not using too much memory, not crashing, etc.

In a tightly-managed project where the priorities are clearly
defined by someone in charge (whether that's an individual, a small
group of leaders, or a more democratic model like you seem to be
proposing), you're still going to end up with a set of official
priorities.  Such priorities end up as official sanction to ignore
some aspects of quality in favor of others, for example, being
willing to sacrifice any amount of memory use in order to get a
speed improvement.

Now, we absolutely need to be willing to make tradeoffs; we should
absolutely not assume that the status quo speed vs. memory tradeoff
is the correct one, nor should we assume that all of the projects we
currently work on are worth our time.

But I think making tradeoffs in the presence of clearly-defined
priorities stating that one side of the tradeoff is more important
tends to produce bad decisions.  If we all agree as a community that
speed is really important, it becomes really hard (and maybe
completely socially unacceptable) to make an argument that a
particular speed for memory tradeoff is the wrong one to be making.

On the flip side, though, there are decisions that have to be based
on priorities, such as which things ship as supported products.  We
also can't be afraid to make these decisions because they look like
dictating priorities.  But I think in many cases they come somewhat
naturally (though not without controversy) from what people are
focusing on.

-David

-- 
๐„ž   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   ๐„‚
๐„ข   Mozilla                           http://www.mozilla.org/   ๐„‚
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Reply via email to