Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote: > > We are also not in a democracy. We are in a security related open > > source project. > > Don't get me wrong. This is an organization issue. I am not talking > about forking OpenSC, this would be stupid.
Not neccessarily - if there is critical mass I think it is the only reasonable course. > The website, teams and tools should remain. But we need a simplier > and more effective approach. The tools (git and Gerrit) are as simple and effective as they can be. They are truly state of the art. That's the tools part. As for workflow, that will only be simple and effective when there is agreement on what is desired in the codebase. I consider it prudent to focus on quality, in particular for security related projects. That means that changes are not included on a whim or just because they are proposed. It means that development will be much slower than would be the case with a focus other than quality, e.g. a focus on rapid introduction of new features. > Remember that under European law, all contributors hold a copyright > on OpenSC code. The leader is not the copyright holder. When > nothing happens in a project, we have the right to change > leadership. Everyone has copyright, but actually that is not the key; the license already guarantees freedom for the code. "Leadership" is not related to the copyright, and since the codebase has a free license, actually "change leadership" is nothing other than starting a new project. > Holding elections will allow to decide how to organize the project. No, not really. Holding elections may allow to decide how to organize a different project using the same codebase from the same copyright holders under the same or a compatible license. A fork. > IMHO, a reasonable timeframe to fix organization issues should be > around one month. We are today 19th February 2012. If within a > month all these issues are not fixed, I will incorporate a Charity > with other OpenSC members and call for elections of a board. I don't think you should wait. If you can find enough people to participate in the fork then as I said I think you should do it with determination; if there is hesitation then the fork is doomed to fail already before it has begun. I for one will stay at opensc-project.org and hope that it will never hold elections. What little I might be able to contribute I'd prefer to contribute to code. It's strange that democracy and bureacracy are proposed to move a software project forward, and that perfect commits isn't seen as a perhaps more effective path. //Peter
pgpzT1owJhBL4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
