Hoi, Actually the issue is no longer only that. It is also very much about how a subset of people high jack the conversation by their uncompromising stance. When they feel they might leave, I personally prefer it when they stop their posturing and decide either way.
When they want to stay, they do not need to be welcomed, they are part of us. When they go, they are welcome and they can take with them everything we have in the sense of data and software. It is then for them to show that their proof is in their pudding. In the mean time WMF will continue to engage in best practices both technically and socially and when they cook something nice, what is on offer is there for the eating as well. As far as I am concerned, put up or shut up. It has been advertised widely that bugs will be squashed. It is also advertised widely that changes will be considered as long as they are reasonable and do not interfere with our prime directive. Again, it is about the readers not super users. Thanks, GerardM On 25 August 2014 11:16, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > The issue is not just that individual users may want to opt out, it's > whether it should be activated by default for readers. There is also the > matter of licensing information. > > I'm not aware of where "thermonuclear was was threatened". There were, and > continues to be, discussion about forking. MV is merely the latest > occurrence of products with major problems being pushed into production and > made default. That needs to be addressed, and the fact that the problems > with MV happened after AFT5 and VE *and* after the creation of the > Engineering Community Liaisons suggests deep, long-term problems with > product development. I believe that Lila said that the Board wants her to > transform WMF and I am glad that there seems to be agreement that Product > will be an early subject of transformation. I have reservations about > forking for reasons that I can explain if necessary. It would be a lot > easier if WMF would transform itself, starting with Product, and Lila > appears to intend to make this happen. I hope that the processes for > Product will be democratic and consensus-based. Grantmaking has already > demonstrated the effectiveness of community-based decision making with FDC > and IEGCom, and I hope to see a similar model emerge for Product. If it > doesn't, there is enough anger in the community, especially on DEWP, that a > fork is possible. The community is smart enough collectively to figure out > a way to make a fork happen, and some of us have been discussing the > mechanics of how this would work. We could do it, but reforming WMF is > preferable. I hope that Lila can and will do this. Internal transofmration > is preferable to replacing WMF. > > Pine > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>