Maybe the tradition should be of an Apache project? :)

 From my limited interaction w/ the Linux kernel community, it's a  
very different beastie...

geir

On Jan 1, 2009, at 10:47 PM, Noah Slater wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 09:15:21AM +1030, Antony Blakey wrote:
>> No. The primary reason is "why change - the current mechanism has  
>> worked for a
>> year". Damien (project lead) doesn't regard change as necessary,  
>> and a
>> significant change to support top-level reflexivity (which is your  
>> primary
>> thrust) doesn't have support from the other gatekeepers. There is  
>> some support
>> for name identity, although I suspect not enough to prompt a change.
>
> I appreciate you're frustrated with the current situation Antony,  
> but I think
> it's unfair for you to be claiming any kind of consensus without a  
> vote. I would
> be interested in seeing a patch, explanation, and vote. I've already  
> expressed
> my agreement with many of the points you've raised, and I'm not the  
> only one.
>
> It's pretty pointless for us to keep sending emails over proposed  
> changes to the
> code without actually seeing the changes. So, in the tradition of  
> the Linux
> kernel, show the code and let's have a vote!
>
> -- 
> Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater