At 11:12 PM 10/10/00 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 06:01:16PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > "General consensus" is best, but that can't be guaranteed. "Consensus of
> > the ruling council" is more attainable, but there's that whole "ruling
> > council" thing to contend with. "What Larry says" is best, but what
> happens
> > if he doesn't, or gets hit by a bus at some point?
>
>I'd be happy with "what the project manager says". We trust the project
>manager to be able to gauge "general consensus" and decide what's best for
>Perl. It gives us a "what Larry says" style polity without the sacred cow.
>
>And if the project manager goes mad (in the case of Nat, more mad :) and we
>have to shoot him, then Larry should do that. And if Larry gets bussed, look
>around at other open source projects and see what happens when the
>maintainer's unmaintainable - people either stick it out, or fork.
And that all works for me. Anyone care to RFC it? :)
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
