From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id HAA32267; Sat, 20 Mar 2004 07:30:47 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA31868 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2004 07:30:46 +0100 (MET) Received: from mz1.forethought.net (mzpi3.forethought.net [216.241.36.12]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2K6VFKW027276 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2004 07:31:16 +0100 Received: from [216.241.35.41] (helo=swordfish) by mz1.forethought.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1B4a0K-0001aM-FT for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 23:30:44 -0700 Received: from matt by swordfish with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1B4a0O-0006oA-00 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 23:30:48 -0700 Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 23:30:47 -0700 From: Matt Gushee To: caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Proposed community structure (was Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar) Message-ID: <20040320063047.GB26090@swordfish> Reply-To: Matt Gushee Mail-Followup-To: caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr References: <4059994E.2010802@socialtools.net> <20040318151234.B21768@pauillac.inria.fr> <1079653304.990.89.camel@ice.gerd-stolpmann.de> <405AEB1D.6040109@socialtools.net> <1079717412.1319.83.camel@ice.gerd-stolpmann.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1079717412.1319.83.camel@ice.gerd-stolpmann.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i X-Miltered: at nez-perce by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; gushee:01 mgushee:01 havenrock:01 caml-list:01 ocaml's:01 2004:99 gerd:01 stolpmann:01 gushee:01 englewood:01 manure:01 mgushee:01 havenrock:01 ignores:01 --lao:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Keywords: X-UID: 261 On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 06:30:12PM +0100, Gerd Stolpmann wrote: > I hope we don't need such a committee. First we should try to seek a > consensus. I suppose this will almost always be successful, and over > time we will have a situation where the voices of some people will have > more weight than the voices of others, simply because they are naturally > respected. > > So I would suggest to postpone such a committee until it is really > needed, when everything else failed. Yes. As a veteran of many committees (though in a very different context than this), I can testify that the structure and process of an organization can far too easily become an occupation in itself. If you have to decide how to form a committee, well that leads (backward) to the need to decide how to decide ... and surely one of the reasons Open Source has been so successful is that formal organization has been kept to a minimum, making it very easy for motivated people to get involved. -- Matt Gushee When a nation follows the Way, Englewood, Colorado, USA Horses bear manure through mgushee@havenrock.com its fields; http://www.havenrock.com/ When a nation ignores the Way, Horses bear soldiers through its streets. --Lao Tzu (Peter Merel, trans.) ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners