[Foundation] membership, money, and meritocracy

Ivan R. Judson judson at mcs.anl.gov
Fri Apr 4 06:36:07 CST 2003

I haven't read all the way through this thread yet. But I feel compelled to
respond to Peter because this is a bright spot in the recent posts.

I *believe* (having not spoken with others lately) that the point of the
original suggestion was merely an attempt to start the discussion that the
JSF needs to now figure out some self-organization.  This is needed now
because we don't want to see the JSF bloat into some ineffective group that
has no goals, directions, or purpose.

Perhaps that was lost in the ensuing suggestions for how to avoid the

The issues are as follows:

1. Slowing the growth of the JSF
2. Trimming dead weight from the JSF
3. Maintaining a good balance of commercial and non-commercial

A fee attempts to address #1 and #2, but could adversely affect #3, although
matt has suggested solutions.

I think there has been a major shift in the appearance of Jabber over the
past couple of years. The JSF is definitely *not* the jabber hacker
community (yes there are those that straddle), but the leaders of the effort
to bring Jabber more success than something like IRC, or MOO.  These
technologies have gained some legitimacy, but they are not as widely
accepted as IM -- why is that?

So, I'll bring this to a close by suggesting that the only fruitful way to
navigate this discussion is to maintain our focus on the goal, how are we
going to drive forward progess on Jabber? How do we effectively manage the
JSF process to enable that goal?


PS -- At the end of this discussion it's not clear where I'll end up either.
I have not actively contributed or led a project in the past year, but I
have been actively promoting the technology and trying to leverage it into
various projects that I've been leading (like the Access Grid).

> -----Original Message-----
> From: members-admin at jabber.org 
> [mailto:members-admin at jabber.org] On Behalf Of Peter Millard
> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 4:51 PM
> To: members at jabber.org
> Subject: Re: [Foundation] membership, money, and meritocracy
> Matt Tucker wrote:
> [Stuff munched...]
> > I think Peter's made a good case that additional steps
> > should be taken. The whole discussion is aimed at making the Jabber 
> > community the strongest and most active community possible 
> -- it's not 
> > about locking people out.
> Exactly... It seems to me that the JSF should not _BE_ the 
> community, it should _LEAD_ the community.
> Everyone who writes an apache module isn't a member of the 
> Apache Software Foundation. I think moving the JSF towards a 
> more leadership and driving role would be good for the 
> community and help spure growth. Folks who want to just 
> "innovate" don't have to be tied down with the 
> responsibilities of being a JSF member.
> pgm.
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members

More information about the Members mailing list