[Foundation] A proposal.
Dave Smith
dizzyd at jabber.org
Sat Apr 5 22:33:49 CST 2003
On Saturday, Apr 5, 2003, at 20:37 America/Denver, Shawn Wilton wrote:
> This proposal is short and simple.
>
> Get rid of the council.
So you want to get rid of a body of experts that have driven consensus
and established functional protocols in a short amount of time?! Don't
even tell me that 80 (or even 20) developers could reliably and
efficiently drive consensus around protocol extensions. Consider also
that the Jabber project has _always_ had a "council" -- a small group
of core developers who actually drove the protocol forward. What the
JSF has done is simply formalize the concept.
Let's not fix something that isn't broken.
> Extricate members that are not developers. Non-developers may be
> allowed in but can't vote on protocol addendums.
How many developers do you know that like to do marketing or other
non-development tasks? In the JSF, I know of only one -- Iain. Sure
there may be a few more, but for the most part, developers don't do
those sorts of things...by the definition of their title.
"d..e..v..e..l..o..p..e..r"
We _need_ diversity in our ranks.
Also, by kicking out all members who aren't developers, you'd be
kicking out Peter St. Andre. Call me crazy, but I believe that LAST
thing we should do right now is get rid of the one person who has
poured their heart and soul into making the JSF work.
> Allow sponsorship by companies for certain projects to be voted on by
> the entire group. Projects should be placed under a BSD license so
> companies are more willing to sponsor projects.
>
> Require a majoral vote allowing for a 1/3 veto requirement.
What exactly do you want to vote on?
> Once a member is in they're in for life unless voted out due to
> misconduct.
No way. People's interests change. "Membership" is meaningless unless
the "member" is participating. Hence the current rules regarding losing
membership if one doesn't vote.
Personally, I think the JSF should get rid of all people who aren't
actively participating in a "team" (such as marketing or compliance or
protocol dev.) You know what? That would mean I would no longer be a
member of the JSF -- and I'm cool with that. Right now, I don't have
the time to pour into it, so I shouldn't have any privileges.
Participation is at the heart of the JSF.
Diz
More information about the Members
mailing list