On 02/11/2007, Roy T. Fielding <fielding at gbiv.com> wrote: > On Nov 2, 2007, at 1:58 PM, Glynn Foster wrote: > > Alan Coopersmith wrote: > >> 1) Inform all three of Indiana's sponsoring communities about the > >> release > >> plans requirement of the constitution. > > > > Awesome, yet another way of slowing down getting software to our > > users. Anything > > else we can do to get in the way? > > If you had initiated the project within a community that was scoped > for building a distribution, then that decision would have been made > already and by the very same people who did the work to produce the > software. > > I told you this at the time the project was proposed, and you ignored > it to satisfy the immediate desire of the internal marketing team > at Sun. Don't blame anyone else for these problems -- they are > entirely manufactured by your refusal to accept community input from > day one, and they will continue until the organization reflects the > reality of how you intend to govern this project (one way or another).
Sorry, but that's wrong. There is currently nothing in the constitution that stipulates that projects must live under a certain community. Your claim otherwise is surprising given you drafted the constitution. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall
