At 15:31 05.01.2002 +0100, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: [Snip]
>In my mind, all this long trail of thoughs yields the following >equation: > > metacommunity size * community coherence * individual freedom = constant This equation is misleading. Coherence and individual freedom are not inversely proportional, perhaps related but not inversely proportional. That much is certain. >in result, if we unify the two projects, we double the size of the >metacommunity and we must pay the price of decreased coherence and/or >decreased individual freedom. >But are we sure the pros outweight the cons? No, we can't be sure. The experiment cannot be undone and started over. Anyway, contrary to my previous hints, I am unsure if having XML and Jakarta would benefit either Jakarta or XML. If someone cares enough about a particular XML project nothing keeps him/her from participating in that project. IMHO, XML does not and will never have a community as long as two of its most important projects directly compete with each other. The success of one is related with the failure of the other. XML Community? Won't happen in a million years. How the did Crimson become an Apache project anyway? Unity and coherence (the subject of this thread) are strongly related to management and decision making. Since we don't have a manager, we must have a healthy decision making process. The current system of voting where each participant is granted veto power is a system geared towards non-decision making. This was perhaps one of the intentions of the founders of the ASF. Anyone know where -1 tradition came from? My suggestion is institute a new tradition where members of the community can make proposals which the community votes on. Advantages: decisions can be made. Disadvantages: decisions can be made. The required majority for the adoption of proposals can be simple or qualified. Even if the qualified majority is 3/4, this would be better than the veto system we have today. Although a veto can be overridden by a 3/4 majority, as far as I know, this has never happened in the past. Today someone voting -1 means end of discussion. I dare anyone to -1 that. Regards, Ceki -- Ceki Gülcü - http://qos.ch -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>