While maintaining that I am essentially an outsider in this discussion, I was CC-ed so I will reply. I read both of the indicated comment differently than you do I think.
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 4:57 PM Peter Rabbitson <ribasu...@cpan.org> wrote: > On 10/04/2016 11:36 PM, Matt S Trout wrote: > > > > Had I not got explicit agreement before transferring anything that all I > > was doing was easing co-maint addition, I would absolutely not have gone > > down this route. > > Since we are digging in the past: had I not gotten an unambiguous > legitimization of my 1st come from both Matt[1] and an even stronger one > from David[2] ( in addition to a large swathe of the community ) I don't > think I would have returned for additional 3 years trying to rescue this > project from its immense architectural debt. > > [1] > > https://web.archive.org/web/20161004214347/http://blogs.perl.org/users/peter_rabbitson/2013/07/crowdsourcing-self-confidence.html#comment-1129854 Matt does affirm a role for you here, but he also asserts his role as organizer. > > [2] > > https://web.archive.org/web/20161004214347/http://blogs.perl.org/users/peter_rabbitson/2013/07/crowdsourcing-self-confidence.html#comment-1130257 > Earlier in the thread, David specifically says that this is not the venue to be designated BDFL. Any future comment to the effect that you are later on must imply "if so designated in a proper venue". I agree with him. While yes I think it would have been helpful if the intention made at the time of the transfer of first-come to you were in a more public forum than IRC logs, I also think that comments halfway down a BPO posting isn't a great place to assert BDFL-ness. (BTW, I'm not sure if I'm actually on this list so if it bounces could someone please forward it? I am only actually participating on the DBIC list, I didn't expect the discussion to migrate back here).
