Thank you for the clarification, and I apologize for my misrepresentation.
-Adrian
On 4/29/2011 10:00 AM, David E Jones wrote:
On Apr 26, 2011, at 12:31 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
I like the idea of working with the current community to get a consensus on
these things and then loosely enforcing them. I keep holding out hope that the
desire to produce a quality product will increase.
I understand your viewpoint of just starting over with new code and new
community members. At first glance that seems attractive. But it seems to me
that's like curing cancer by executing the patient.
No, I don't think you do understand it. The last time you represented "my"
viewpoint this way I responded with how what you described was different. I'll do it
again here.
My goal is not to get rid of the community, my goal is to split the community
to various sub-communities involved in different projects which make up an
ecosystem of projects based on the same framework and data model, as opposed to
a single project for everything. This will reduce conflict and encourage people
to try different ideas with end-users in the position to choose between them
based on what works best for them.
A distributed community, as opposed to a centralized community, would allow many more people to get
involved with much less conflict than our current rather small community. The point is not to
exclude people or get rid of a community, the point is to enable more people to get involved and
move it more towards a "free market" structure as opposed to the current "central
planning" type of structure that OFBiz operates under.
-David
