Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: votes

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

Martin Rubey <address@hidden> writes:

| Dear Ayal,
| 
| Ayal <address@hidden> writes:
| 
| > A democracy is not always the best approach. 


To some extent, I agree with Ayal -- judging from my own experience
and involvement in some large scale open source projects (eg. GCC).
Though I can also cite the standardization of ISO C++ (done by
volunteers who pay to work on the project) as also a counter example
to some extent.

But, I do agree with many of the fundamental points he made.  Except
having only one visionaire.  I believe having a ``college'' is better.
This is from my experience on GCC -- which had had a One Single
Visionnaire till a decade ago.   GCC is doing much much better now
than before.  It is not run by popular votes, but it is not run either
by dictatorship.  Interested people, working system engineers, those
directly affected by GCC, collaborate to come to a decision.  A
release manager coordinates all of that.  There is a steering
committee to prevent the project to be taken over by one individual or
coorporate.  But the steering committee has no say on the technical
decisions -- I believe that is a good thing, but also acknowledge
other forms.  

With Axiom, I'm seeing a repetition of the GCC history.  To prevent
further implosion I would suggest a college of `trusted' maintainers
with strong interest in Axiom, and a steering committee that takes
care of the `political issues'.

My take on this is that if Axciom is supposed to be a research plaform,
then the interested *working* scientists should participate in the
college -- not necessarily a purely democratic participation.
Because, they are affected by Axiom and Axiom affects them.  If you
don't have to base your daily research work on Axiom, then it does not
matter much whether it is operational only in 30 years on in 3000
years.

If Axiom is supposed to be just a hobby, then it makes sense that it
is just one man's toy.  But then, that should be said clearly so as
not to waste the working scientists resource.

-- Gaby