Re: Source changes
Juergen Luethje wrote:
>
> Gary Shingles wrote:
> >
> > Juergen Luethje wrote:
> > >
> > > Derek Parnell wrote:
> > >
> > > > Juergen Luethje wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I think it would be best to send this library to the User
> > > > > Contributions
> page.</font></i>
> > > > > After some months, when people use the code and like the code, and
> > > > > have
> given</font></i>
> > > > > some micro bucks to it, it could be considered to put this lib into
> > > > > the
> > > > > standard release of Euphoria.
> > > >
> > > > Fair enough, but I'm not going to do that. I'll submit it for peer
> > > > review and
> > > > after a few corrections/improvements I'll submit it to SourceForge and
> > > > let
> Robert</font></i>
> > > > make the call.
> > >
> > > I naively had assumed that "Open Source" means, besides other things, that
> > > such a decision would be made democratically by all members of the
> > > Euphoria
> > >
> > > community.
> >
> > I don't have any objection to including it in the standard distribution (so
> > that would make it 2 all).
>
> IMHO there should be a formal voting system ASAP.
The idea of voting sounds very democratic, however the way in which that voting
system plays a part in the process of developing Euphoria, I am afraid, might
become more bureaucratic than democratic.
Besides, with this issue (I actually forget whether it is over get, or Derek's
thing) what if you are correct and it should not be included, or done, but there
is a vote and it is included, or done... wouldn't you rather have the opportunity
to continue to discus something rather than having it all come to a final,
binding, vote?
If for example we did have a voting system for Euphoria "features", how would
you see that working? What would the process be?
Gary
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
