Gervase Markham wrote:
>
> > Let's set up a committee to organize the formation of these two
> > teams. And a sub-committee to decide what this organizational
> > committee should be called.
>
> :-) Don't you think this is sensible, then?
No, I don't. I think committees and meetings effectively close off the
massive peer review which the open source process thrives on, by
limiting the number of eyes, ears, and brains available for solving the
problems.
> I think it's a good way of
> disentangling the two parts. Better ideas always welcome...
Hold discussions in the relevant groups, just as you did with the
mozilla.* reorganization -- discussions which are moderated (in the
debate sense, not in the Usenet sense) by the person who is actually
going to make the changes.
> And are you volunteering to help with one of the above? It would be
> great to have you on the long term team...
>...
If you must have committees, put me down for either or both of them (if
only one, then the long-term one). But I'd rather you didn't have them
at all.
--
Matthew `mpt' Thomas, Mozilla user interface QA
Mozilla UI decisions made within 48 hours, or the next one is free
