[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnash-dev] FSF directed donations / committee
From: |
Sandro Santilli |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnash-dev] FSF directed donations / committee |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Oct 2011 17:20:31 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 07:23:55AM -0600, Rob Savoye wrote:
> > Personally, I think such a committee, with well defined decision making
> > process rules, would not only help dealing with the FSF but also make it
> > easier to take decisions.
>
> As I mentioned before, you seem to want to apply this offer for fund
> raising to establishing some kind of control over other facets of the
> Gnash project.
Of course I want to estabilish some kind of control.
Mostly quality control. Having invested a lot of effort in
the project I care about it not getting ruined.
If Gnash is a community project, why shouldn't community members
have more control over it ? Or what does it mean to be a community
project ? Note I'm not a simple user, but a top committer...
http://www.ohloh.net/p/gnash/contributors
> This is why I turned down the FSF on their offer, as it
> would just lead to more infighting and flame wars as we'd fight over
> allocating money.
We never fought about money allocation so far, only about technical
issues (which I'm more concerned about).
> I'm personally a big believer in the benevolent dictator model of
> project management, *not* the committee idea.
These are interesting readings about governance models on OSS Watch:
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/benevolentdictatorgovernancemodel.xml
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/meritocraticGovernanceModel.xml
For each one there are also template governance documents which would
help defining one for Gnash.
I'm more for a meritocratic governance model.
--strk;
() Free GIS & Flash consultant/developer
/\ http://strk.keybit.net/services.html