On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 09:29:56AM +0100, Ceki G�lc� wrote: > > I keep wondering why you keep bringing up Duncan's Whoa > Bessie... mail. I mean this one: > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=97712718421034&w=2 > > Is it just for historical purposes? Is it because Duncan expresses > interesting ideas with eloquence? Sure, Duncan may have been wrong in > the Ant context but that should not discredit his ideas altogether. > > The liberal ideas expressed by Stefano, Sam and to some extent Costin > are very inspiring and definitely please a wider audience than Duncan's > ideas defending the actions of a selfish pig as he puts hit. (No, I > don't think that Duncan is a selfish pig and you shouldn't either.) > > However, liberal ideologies are just that, ideologies. While Duncan's > theory of benevolent dictators might not find favor in the eyes of > this public, we should not discard it as being contrary to the Apache > way.
If you mean formally, then absolutely we should, in big flashing lights :) The Benevolent Dictatorship model, where some committers' vetoes don't count as much as others, is clearly at odds with the Apache model. > We should instead recognize it as being a legitimate way of > development. Sure. > It may even be the dominant way of development at Apache under > disguise. I agree. However, Apache benevolent dictators are first among equals, with no _formal_ claim to dictatorship. The thread you reference is an affirmation of this small but crucial difference. --Jeff
