Chris Withers wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
> > 
> > a mailing list, are needed at least to get contributors going. I had
> > to ask about releasing ParsedXML several times until I got some kind of
> > 'aye' out of anyone. And it still wasn't clear. I shouldn't have to
> > be that persistent.
> Well, and now I'm being devils advocate, this is Open Source.
> "Just do it" (now where have I heard that before ;-)

That doesn't follow these guidelines:

with unclear ideas on how you actually get moved from Inception to
Eleboration to Construction. I need to post to zope-dev and then wait
for Inception->Elaboration to happen, and the 'maintainer of the software
product in question' (who do I whine to if I don't know who this is in the
first place?) will then just listen and pick up on it and do the
editorial and technical review. In practice, I am not sure if any
identifiable maintainer steps up, though I do get feedback from ZC

This is more than just an 'aye', and I need to be persistent about that

>From Elaboration->Construction I just need "if everything is in order,
a CVS branch will be created for the project team to start working on". By
whom? Do fishbowl proposals commonly make it here?

> If you do it wrong, whatever that means, someone will let you know, but you're
> not breaking any lawas and activity, as you've shown with ParsedXML, is always
> better than inactivity :-)

I agree that I should just 'do it', but I'm not following the guidelines if 
I do it, and though I'm Dutch and toleration of not following the rules is
institutional here, I also don't think it's the ideal situation. Either 
we work out who is maintainer for what and the fishbowl process for the
*maintainers* is spelled out (the fishbowl introduction focuses much more
on the artifacts to be produced than on the human aspects), or we scrap
or completely overhaul the fishbowl process as we do something else anyway.



Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to