On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 9:22 AM, Florent Daigniere nextg...@freenetproject.org wrote:
> The project is in terrible shape due to the lack of leadership, and > > most of it boils down to the fact that you're just not around (I'm sure > > you're busy with other things). > It is certainly true that I'm preoccupied with other things (namely making a living - an unfortunate necessity for most people). Should someone else come along with the time, motivation, and expertise to take over as coordinator, I would welcome it. No such person has come forward. What's wrong is not just the current funding allocation fiasco (who will ever consider sponsoring us, now that we've shown that we don't even know what to do with the money we have?). We're in the midst of a process to do exactly that, a process which is now moving forward. - we have no roadmap; we need one. That's precisely what this process is designed to create. - the consensus / democratic / hipster way of taking decisions doesn't work for open-source projects that aren't funded. Why do you assume that the process won't work before we've even tried it? Open source projects are a meritocracy where do-ers have power; those that disagree are free to fork and become do-ers. That seems self-contradictory to me - you just recommended having a roadmap, and yet now you seem to be arguing that a volunteer-run project can't have a roadmap because nobody can be compelled to do anything they don't want to do. - the current level of funding doesn't give much time/resources and it's clearly a waste of time for everyone involved to argue about processes for allocating them. Who is arguing? Most people seem to be just getting on with working within the process. Everyone had ample opportunity to offer feedback on the process months ago when it was first proposed. I don't understand why you and others have waited until we're in the middle of the process before trying to poke holes in it. Time is money, even if it's only volunteers's. Just call the shots, those that disagree are free to leave (and that comes from someone who has a long history of disagreeing with most of your previous calls :)). I'm puzzled as of why you've decided to do things differently this time around... Because I noticed that a solid "core" of Freenet developers seemed very resentful of me getting involved in the project again, and so I concluded that if I just came in and started to bark orders at people, they would not respond well. What's the strategy/long-term roadmap for the project? I mean, once we've blown the current financial resources, what's the plan? I would say the goal is two-fold: a) Get Freenet to the point that it is easy to use, comparable to contemporary software-projects in terms of UI design, marketing etc. b) Ensure that Freenet achieves its goal of ensuring true freedom of communication (which means it needs to be secure, etc) PS: To be cristal clear, I'm fine with Freenet not having resources, being a research/toy project, I definitely don't want more users/problems... but I don't understand the logic/strategy pursued by those that do. If I wanted to be autocratic I'd immediately allocate $5k to get professional designers to redesign the website from the ground-up, however I have a strong feeling that would be met by howls of protest by those who (for reasons that make no sense to me) think the website is just fine the way it is. Ian. -- Ian Clarke Founder, The Freenet Project Email: i...@freenetproject.org _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
