I think we have the gist of the problem right
there, in the lines quoted. I see a plain clash
of perspectives there.
We *might* benefit from the new ideas, generated
in the way of hobbie or otherwise.
We *would* benefit from general production going
forward.
I won't go so far as to declare the "production
manager" some sort of supreme authority.
However, it is obvious that not every idea is
bound to make it into the (long-existing)
software product, for which PM is, after all,
responsible.
So I'd say there's an *urgent* need for some
kind of contribution rejection procedure.
Something like following: (a) Carlos (or
anybody) with his PM's hat on has the first
(immediate) say on what is *not* going in *right
now*. (b) However, there also must be an (almost
immediate) request for comments going into the
list, formal-like. (c) If the request gathers no
evidence supporting the innovation, everything
stays as it was. (d) Otherwise, steps are taken etc.
I believe this is simple enough and sufficient
to block (or alleviate) the rise of bad feelings.
And do not bother with forks, multiply repos
etc., that's silly. There is no enough of human
resource here as it is.
-Yury
On 11/11/2013 02:38 AM, "Rodolfo García Peñas
(kix)" wrote:
On 10/11/2013 23:32, Carlos R. Mafra wrote:
...
So, what is the problem? For me wmaker is a hobbie. I spent a lot of
time writting patches, thinking about new ideas. Sometimes I make
...
--
To unsubscribe, send mail to wmaker-dev-unsubscr...@lists.windowmaker.org.
