On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:55:20 +0100 PID0 <p1dz3r0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Just to add: what better way do you think a government agency would have > to disrupt a TC replacement than by simply having a few people object to > a decision? Restarting the whole consultation process again. The project > would slowly die off as users/devs got frustrated at the lack of > progress and left, it'd just look like it died of internal politics > (which it would have). This is the single thing that bugs me the most. Pid0: you have some good arguments, the last one--as Alain put it--particularly hit the nail on the head. Although I do not agree with some of the arguments in general, much of that doubt is being convinced by the problem of the last paragraph. As I already indicated in my last mail, I believe it could be a fitting solution to elect a large enough PMC, preferrably without a chair.The question arises though, how to nominate, elect, and how often to re-elect. Also I wonder if the PMC is supposed to have complete power over the project. This reminds me of the parliamentary chaos from state-politics we see so often. This needs more input, also from other core members (e.g. Stephen, Bill, Frank etc.). -- Niklas At the time of writing, no warrants have ever been served to me, Niklas Lemcke, nor am I under any personal legal compulsion concerning the CipherShed project. I do not know of any searches or seizures of my assets.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
