Gary Poster wrote: > On Mar 3, 2009, at 12:31 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote: > >> Hey Gary, >> >> [panarchist approach where we have people starting groups that could >> compete for attention] > > [Had to look up panarchist, but yes, essentially.]
I shouldn't have used that word, I actually didn't realize anyone else had made it up beyond me but it seems to have a century + history. :) [snip] > I think your statements and mine mesh well enough. If you don't > agree, that's fine. Practically, it means I support what you are > trying to do (and in fact I would tend towards your camp in my > proposed panarchy), if from a slightly different perspective. Sure, they mesh well enough. I'm just pointing out that freely competing projects only work to a certain extent; as soon as there's code or community resources shared between them there are going to be points of conflicts of interests that need to be resolved somehow. I think often this can be resolved to the satisfaction of everybody, but I do think we need a structure in which things can be resolved. Freely competing structures might equal no structure, and that's something to watch out for. > I'm glad you sent your proposal email first. Now that you have, I > hope you pursue your vision without needing 100% buy-in from the > community. I'm optimistic that you will. :-) I'm a stubborn fool with no idea of what I seem to be signing up for, so I guess I might. :) Regards, Martijn _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )