I think the current guidelines are a good starting point even though
Michi has raised some valid points. Should the guidelines be published
as is, or should Michi's issues be addressed prior to publishing any
guidelines? I would opt for publishing them as is (hence my +1 vote),
then gradually refine the guidelines over time.
- I think the mission of Apache Lenya needs be more detailed, e.g.
framework with out of the box samples, scalable, performant, backwards
compatible, ... I think we really need to define our goals resp. link
to a document which is defining the goals explicitely, otherwise I am
afraid this whole thing is pointless.
I think the current mission statement is the most concise possible
definition of what Lenya is. The mission statement addresses the two
singly most important aspect of Lenya - open source content management -
and separation of content and presentation.
This definition does not get bogged down in the details of how this is
to be accomplished. I think maybe under that mission statement there
could be a link to another page which explains how we go about
accomplishing this goal. But as a simple concise definition of what
Lenya's core mission is, I think the statement is perfect.
Without being negative, but generally speaking I think people haven't
really
read this document closely and hence just say +1. I hope I am wrong.
I've read the document closely. I don't understand some of the issues
you have raised, probably as I'm not as active in the community as I
would like to be. But my vote +1 is that I think these guidelines are
appropriate and should be published as is. Once this occurs the
community has committed to something and it is a starting point which
can be revised.
Nevertheless I still believe that we should start with a white sheet
of paper
and vote on every "paragraph" and also attach a reasoning for each
paragraph.
I think this approach would lead to endless months of discussion without
actually committing to anything. The proposed guidelines are quite
large, yet you have only given 10 objections to them. Even if these are
just the first 10 things you have had time to raise, should we discard
the rest of the document and start from nothing? That sounds like a
complete waste of time in my opinion.
If the project guidelines were a piece of software, would you delay
releasing it completely until it was completely bug free and everybody
agreed that it operated exactly the way they wanted? Or would you
release the software, and then improve upon it with each new release?
Maybe this is a silly question as Lenya hasn't had a new release for
over a year... and maybe this is the heart of the problem with the Lenya
community.
Michael R
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
