kicad-developers team mailing list archive

["Mateusz" <komorkiewicz@...>]

I've been hesitating whether write this or not, but I want to spell out this questions.

> If yes, this is actually counter-productive in my view, since we don't 
> actually have a democracy here. (A democracy or a republic requires a 
> constitution.) Given the circumstances, IMO, votes should be weighted 
> in proportion to the size of the respective contributions of each 
> voter. Otherwise it is like allowing folks to vote who have not paid 
> taxes, and that doesn't seem to work too well, since they just vote 
> themselves money. It is also not a meritocracy, where according to 
> wikipedia, reward is according to talent. As of now, it is simply a 
> system which respects the value of past contributions. 
> In my view Jean-Pierre by far would get the heaviest vote. But I 
> suspect that if he saw there was widespread support for something which 
> was not going to adversely affect him, that he would not go out of his 
> way to oppose it.

I do agree that democracy is not a good option in such a project.

The problem is I am totally new here. I don't know anyone from "high command" yet I want to contribute. I want to ask you some questions about this project:

1. To become a member of the kicad-devel group I was ask to write what I would like to contribute. If I were accepted does it mean that I have a greenlight to do what I planned?

2. If not, with whom should I consult my ideas? If we don't have democracy,asking questions on mailing group is useless. Maybe I should write direct emails to Jean-Pierre. If he has the heaviest vote, then I need only his approval?

3. If not, could anybody tell me what is the "chain of command" here. Or whom should I bother with my ideas?

I do agree, that it is a good policy, not to give new developers access to SVN. But I want to do something. So maybe you should organise some groups working under supervision of "old" developers? I just feel that I am runningout of my enthusiasm...