Simon Phipps wrote:
> On Dec 14, 2007, at 01:33, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
>
>   
>> While I can't speak for the other members who voted for the amendment,
>> I can tell you that I will never vote to delegate editorial control -
>> as distinguished from layout, navigation, style, and backend
>> management - of shared content to any CG.  I made clear my objections
>> to that on-list and during debate on the call.  The OGB has already
>> taken a decision to solve that problem is a different way.
>>     
>
> Why does that rationale not hold for all other aspects of the  
> community, Keith? How can you ever trust the ON team not to subvert  
> the core of the operating system? How can you trust the packaging  
> system to have integrity? How can you trust that the documentation  
> will not denigrate or misrepresent a key function? How can we all  
> trust the OGB not to make arbitrary decisions?
>   
Indeed, and that was my argument in the discussion we had.

I don't believe that we should hold one demographic of the community 
(technical) to another (editorial).  Keith's argument (IIRC, Keith, 
please correct me if I recall incorrectly) was that editorial content is 
more political; but I don't see any less contentious issues in the 
technical community (default shells, packaging, etc. have all had 
contentious points that were solved within the community)
>> Trust is built from accountability and a track record of good
>> decisions.  The approach we have chosen is a win on an accountability
>> basis and a wash on track record.
>>     
>
>
> So you're saying that the right resolution to the ftpd bug would have  
> been for the OGB to form a sub-committee that did the work of the CG  
> responsible for it?

That's a stretch, IMHO.  I don't believe that's what Keith is saying.

While I agree with Keith's first sentence there: "Trust is built form 
accountability and a track record of good decisions."... my point is 
that unless we allow the community to self-govern and create its own 
content, it won't ever get the chance to build up a track record of good 
decisions.  We can't continue to appoint OGB-appointed boards and 
committees to do everything, otherwise why have we allowed for 
self-governance in the first place?

Teach a man to fish... no?

cheers,
steve

-- 
stephen lau | stevel at opensolaris.org | www.whacked.net


Reply via email to