> From: Cees De Groot
> Here's another question: why would you want a central governance model > for Squeak? [...] > So, all I can see SqF doing is to make sure that people don't > duplicate too much work, by defining some minimal core, and maybe a > clearing house for patches or something like that. In one sense, I would want the central governance to lie exactly in defining and defending that minimal core. In another sense, you're absolutely right - I shouldn't be saying there should be exactly one of these, I should instead be saying to which one of them I'd lend my support (such as it is) and let the OS market fight it out. - Peter |
Just like Cees says, Linus Torvalds is against a central governance
group in OS software projects. You can read what he argues about design and evolution in Linux here: http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0112.0/0004.html It was quite interesting for me. He really likes mimicking the organic / chaotic / biological way of evolution. Cheers all ! r. On 8/19/06, Peter Crowther <[hidden email]> wrote: > > From: Cees De Groot > > Here's another question: why would you want a central governance model > > for Squeak? > [...] > > So, all I can see SqF doing is to make sure that people don't > > duplicate too much work, by defining some minimal core, and maybe a > > clearing house for patches or something like that. > > In one sense, I would want the central governance to lie exactly in > defining and defending that minimal core. > > In another sense, you're absolutely right - I shouldn't be saying there > should be exactly one of these, I should instead be saying to which one > of them I'd lend my support (such as it is) and let the OS market fight > it out. > > - Peter > > |
"Ramiro Diaz Trepat" <[hidden email]> writes:
> Just like Cees says, Linus Torvalds is against a central governance > group in OS software projects. > You can read what he argues about design and evolution in Linux here: > > http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0112.0/0004.html > > It was quite interesting for me. He really likes mimicking the > organic / chaotic / biological way of evolution. A good read, thanks. However, the article talks about *design* approach, not governance. Linus always was and AFAIK still is in favor of him and his deputies making the final decisions. Lots of stuff crosses the desk of these guys, especially since the kernel design includes modules only as an afterthought. The design question is very interesting, for sure: what do you stick to, and what do you let emerge over time? However, that is no different than an author deciding to let a novel develop where it will instead of guiding it with an iron fist. To put it another way, it is one thing to cede power to mysterious forces of organic evolution, and quite another to cede power to real human beings. Linus does the former, but is stingy about the latter. The Squeak community does not seem to have decided yet. Some people have claimed from time to time to be our new fearless leaders, but what does that mean if lots of the older Squeak people just stop taking part, essentially making their own communities? Squeak's Linuses are relatively reticent, and there is no replacement system (democratic and/or economic) that would be automatically guided. So, my take has always been, it would be great if a Linus stepped up, but in the meantime, it is worth thinking very hard about systems that can evolve reasonably without a great fearless leader. -Lex |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |