www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Rules for Revolutionaries
Date Sat, 09 Nov 2002 10:44:42 GMT
On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 09:29:56AM +0100, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> 
> I keep wondering why you keep bringing up Duncan's Whoa
> Bessie... mail. I mean this one:
> 
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=97712718421034&w=2
> 
> Is it just for historical purposes? Is it because Duncan expresses
> interesting ideas with eloquence? Sure, Duncan may have been wrong in
> the Ant context but that should not discredit his ideas altogether.
> 
> The liberal ideas expressed by Stefano, Sam and to some extent Costin
> are very inspiring and definitely please a wider audience than Duncan's
> ideas defending the actions of a selfish pig as he puts hit. (No, I
> don't think that Duncan is a selfish pig and you shouldn't either.)
> 
> However, liberal ideologies are just that, ideologies. While Duncan's
> theory of benevolent dictators might not find favor in the eyes of
> this public, we should not discard it as being contrary to the Apache
> way.

If you mean formally, then absolutely we should, in big flashing lights
:)  The Benevolent Dictatorship model, where some committers' vetoes
don't count as much as others, is clearly at odds with the Apache model.

> We should instead recognize it as being a legitimate way of
> development.

Sure.

> It may even be the dominant way of development at Apache under
> disguise.

I agree.  However, Apache benevolent dictators are first among equals,
with no _formal_ claim to dictatorship.  The thread you reference is an
affirmation of this small but crucial difference.


--Jeff


Mime
View raw message