[Squeakfoundation] re: Decision time: Are SCG the steward ofthekernel as proposed?

Craig Latta craig.latta at netjam.org
Thu Mar 20 15:36:35 CET 2003

	Daniel writes:

> To add another reason againt a vote on this (not that I care very
> strongly): I didn't see a need for it because I think we can send the
> right message without providing an official moment of decision -
> after all, people do take their risks whatever we might decide, even
> officially.
> If SCG fubars it, we won't merge their stuff. If they bring us good
> patches (the much more likely outcome), we'll merge them whether they
> have any "officially decided" status or not. Just remember this -
> once we've made decisions on a topic, we'll always be making
> decisions on that topic (paraphrasing Frank Herbert, in one of the
> Dune books). IMHO, giving advice is worth doing permanently, giving
> official badges isn't.

	I agree with this, and it's why I abstained. (By the way, Göran, when
one abstains, it's called an "abstention".)


Craig Latta
craig at netjam.org

More information about the Squeakfoundation mailing list