On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 3:35 PM, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
A pattern we see over and over is that the developers
talk at length
about what they're working on in several venues, then it's released
and people claiming to speak for the community claim they were not
adequately consulted. Pretty much no matter what steps were taken to
do so, and what new steps are taken to do so. Because there's always
someone who claims their own lack of interest is someone else's fault.
Talking in several venues about what one is doing cannot be considered
consensus building. Actually it is the opposite, because it is an extrinsic
change and as such it cannot be appropriated by any ad-hoc community. Even
worse, it gives developers the wrong impression that they are working under
general approval, when actually they might be communicating only with the
people that normally would accept their project, but not the ones that
normally would reject it.
It is of course impossible to involve everyone, but the more voices are
included the better represented will be the interests of the ones that are
not present.
Cheers,
Micru