[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work (Was: Re: why do we need change?)

From: Gregory John Casamento
Subject: Re: Why Unanimous Consent Doesn't Work (Was: Re: why do we need change?)
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 18:54:14 -0700 (PDT)


--- Alex Perez <address@hidden> wrote:

> Dennis Leeuw wrote:
> > Hi Gregory,
> > 
(( SNIP ))
> > 
> > I agree with you that the OpenStep spec should not be leading anymore. I 
> > think GNUstep already has out grown the spec. It should now stand on its 
> > own feet, with own ideas and an its own direction. But before that can 
> > be accomplished we need to show the world we are ready to do that. And I 
> > think a 1.0 release would be a good marker. After that we have to think 
> > about the future for 2.0 and maintain 1.0.
> > 
> > But who is going to take the lead to create a list of things to be done 
> > before we can claim 1.0. And a bigger hurdle for the GNUstep community 
> > how are we going to agree on it. Many of those discussions tend to go no 
> > where on the GNUstep lists.
> > 
> Yes, and frankly this is a perfect opportunity to state that rule by 
> unanimous or even near-unanimous consent is simply not a viable nor 
> sustainable. People disagree. One cannot make everyone happy, nor should 
> they try to in all instances. Currently, I feel the GNUstep project is 
> trying to do so in all instances, with disastrous results.

No one is looking for "unanimous consent" (at least I'm not), only an
intelligent discussion of the issues. I'm trying to say things the way they
are.  If people agree, great, if not, great.

> At some point, it is sometimes necessary to simply *accept* the fact 
> that certain people will be unhappy with certain decisions, which they 
> may view to be controversial (but which many other, perhaps even the 
> majority in many cases, may not).

As I said in a previous email, some of the changes we will make are not going
to be to everyone's liking, but they are necessary.
> Right now, this project isn't going anywhere, and while I do not contest 
> the technical abilities of the leader, I do contest the 
> lets-make-everybody-happy-and-if-we-cant-do-that-then-forget-about-it 
> attitude which seems to be the norm instead of the exception. The 
> project needs a stronger leader. Someone willing to make some tough 
> decisions. The project's long-term health will be better as a result.

GNUstep as a whole needs to be more proactive.  

> IMHO, as always.

Later, GJC

Gregory John Casamento 
-- CEO/President Open Logic Corp. (A MD Corp.)
## Maintainer of Gorm (IB Equiv.) for GNUstep.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]