Please do fork at this point. Frankly a healthy fork creates competition which
is good for progress. So it is with complete sincerity that I wish you luck and
success with a fork effort.
The power to fork is one of the great beauties of open source software and I
think many people are too reluctant to exercise that power.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 8, 2016, at 7:36 PM, Michael <mwpowellhtx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Fork. :-)
On April 8, 2016 9:22:08 PM EDT, Jack Dunaway <jack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Marc: what's your counterproposal?
Pojundery,
Jack R. Dunaway | Wirebird Labs LLC
Jack Dunaway
Founder at Wirebird Labs LLC
wirebirdlabs.com | 512-981-LABS
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Marc Balmer <marc@xxxxxxx> wrote:
1) you suggest a CoC
2) some people (me included) oppose
3) like an offended little child you step down
4) time passes
5) you want to came back, taking full control of everything, making all
decisions on your own, becoming a dicator.
Please refrain from doing so.
If you insist on doing so, that’s fine, as well. Easy enough to fork the
project, if really needed.
That said, if you do take the reins, then I suspect the most likely future
for nanomsg is to wither and die.
(That you use terms like BDFL, dictator for life, leadership, etc. imo
shows that you are a childish person that is not fit to lead a project.)
Am 08.04.2016 um 21:59 schrieb Garrett D'Amore <garrett@xxxxxxxxxx>:
The nanomsg project has been fairly leaderless since I stepped down back
in early January.
I’d hoped that there would be signs of someone else stepping up into the
maintainership role, but that has not occurred. Nobody is merging or
even reviewing contributions that I can tell.
I’ve therefore stated (as of a day or two ago) that I would be — albeit
reluctantly — willing to step back into the leadership. To be clear, if
I were to do this, it would be as a benevolent (hopefully) dictator for
life. That is, I am not interested in trying to lead or govern this
project by consensus. I will listen to opinions, and I may ask for them,
but at the end of the day if I’m lead, then my decisions would be final,
within legal limitations. (Notably legally I cannot relicense the
project — nor do I have any interest in doing so. So the freedom to fork
if you can’t stand my leadership would remain.)
The reason I’m wiling to do this is *solely* because I don’t want to see
nanomsg whither and die. And yet, that seems to be where its headed.
I’ve gotten some indications in support of me doing this in other fora,
and at least one formerly active contributor has indicated that he might
begin contributing again under my leadership.
However, I will not take control of the project by fiat. In particular,
Dirkjan Ochtman needs to make a decision as he is the last person with
commit privileges to the github repo. Technically I still have admin
privileges, but I’d rather not act without his consent.
I’ll also state this — if there is a clear majority of opinions opposed
to my taking this step, then I’ll decline to take the reins. I don’t
want to be an unwelcome leader — I don’t love this project *that* much.
So if you are violently opposed (or in favor) please speak up. Once I
*do* take the reins, I won’t be very likely to give them up again.
That said, if I do *not* take the reins, then I suspect the most likely
future for nanomsg is to whither and die.
To be clear, if you support my action, you *are* supporting a BDFL, so be
sure that a dictator is really what you want. You’ve been warned.
- Garrett
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
