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

[Richard Frith-Macdonald]

On 2005-10-26 08:49:52 +0100 Dennis Leeuw <address@hidden> wrote:

> Sašo Kiselkov wrote:
>> Alright, let's stop arguing (which doesn't lead anywhere) and starting 
>> holes in
>> the air, but let's instead start some heavy-weight brain-storming for ideas 
>> on
>> how to implement the problems at hand. From the dicussions before we already
>> know that:
>> 
>>    - GNUstep needs somewhat tighter management of it's further development
>> 
>>    - GNUstep needs to better react to proposals coming from it's users 
>> (meaning
>> "people using GNUstep", not just end-users)
>> 
>> My proposal for the first point is setting up some sort of "GNUstep Steering
>> Commitee" composed of a bunch of people which would choose the direction.
>> Perhaps 3, 4, or 5 people, the precise number doesn't matter. It should be
>> core-developers, people who have authority, knowledge and wisdom.
>> 
>> As for the second point, I propose setting up a discussion forum (something 
>> like
>> a phpBB or something simmilar) entitled like "GNUstep Future". In the forum
>> there could be sections like:
> 
> Could we for now, just make it a little easier (Although I like your idea). 
> Could we first define and set (e.g. in the wiki or on the progress page). The 
> things we think needs to be done to get GUI and Back to 1.0?
> 
> I think it is a clear goal. Something we can all agree on, I don't think 
> there isn't anybody who doesn't want GNUstep to become 1.0. We just need a 
> list of things to be done and a timeframe.

Can I support this ...

Yes, a new release would be good ... I don't think anybody disagrees and I 
don't think anybody wants to insist on exact OpenStep compliance.

Yes, we want to keep things simple.

Not sure wiki is best for tasks ... how about defining tasks in the GNUstep 
project task manager? We (well, Adam) could set up a new task category for 1.0 
release.