On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Peter Rabbitson <rabbit+d...@rabbit.us>
> It was suggested elsewhere I am against any "core team" plan. This is
> entirely false.
Since in another thread you made it clear you interpret even my polite
requests as the demands of authority, let me stress that I have a couple
questions for you in my personal capacity, that I think would inform the
discussion and that you are free to ignore – though I hope you won't. (And
in the future, please take that statement above as read if I preface my
remarks with 'speaking personally' or the like).
So, speaking personally, I understand clearly that you object to Matt being
part of a core team, but I'd like to understand the *mechanism* by which
you think that will change the evolution of DBIC.
Even if Matt were not on a core team, or even if he didn't have PAUSE
permissions, I don't think he would disappear from the project. I think he
would – if he desired – continue to advocate for his points of view, much
as he does in many other parts of the Perl ecosystem where he doesn't have
Therefore, I'd like to understand whether you think Matt not being on the
core team has merely symbolic power, or whether you think it has a tangible
effect and, if so, how you see that working in practice?
Personally, I don't see how it could have anything beyond symbolic value,
so given that you object to Matt's influence, I think it would be more
effective to identify and advocate for the elevation of contrasting points
of view for a "checks and balances" approach. To that end, I appreciate
that – in proposing your own view of a possible core team you could support
– you've decided to identify some people you think could play a leadership
role. Irrespective of whether they are interested, I think that's a
constructive step, so I thank you for being willing to do so.
David Golden <x...@xdg.me> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg
Searchable Archive: http://firstname.lastname@example.org