On Jul 14, 2008, at 15:23, Alan Burlison wrote: > Peter Tribble wrote: > >> So you have to define the set of top-level groups. And you again >> tangle the >> community structure up by conflating functional and constitutional >> roles. > > Yes. Exactly.
John Plocher argues that consolidations are fed by their constituent projects. Jim suggests that user groups can be a aggregated under a top-level group. There thus seems to me to be an inherent hierarchy that just needs recognising and possibly adding to a little (e.g. a SIGs grouping). What am I missing? S.
