[Foundation-l] Community Assembly

[Pharos]

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/5/13 Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com>:
>
>
>  > The astute reader will, by now, have noticed a certain similarity
>  > between these approaches. If it wasn't working the first time, simply
>  > naming it "governance" won't make it work better the second time...
>
>  I omitted to include a conclusion here. Ooops.
>
>  What we need to do is to actually figure out what governing *needs*
>  done - what issues aren't getting decided now that need thrashed out?
>  - and then work out why it is our existing structures don't let us do
>  that.
>
>  Simply arguing over which new theoretical structure we should install
>  on top of what we already have is doomed to failure, because we're
>  arguing in a vacuum...

The greatest needs for governance would in my opinion would be
developing policy for new languages and new projects (or, possibly,
merging projects).

Thanks,
Pharos