openstack team mailing list archive

[Mark McLoughlin <markmc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Soren,

On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 10:44 +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
> 2012/1/5 Jim Curry <jim.curry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> > We are basing this initial proposal on a lot of input received from the
> > community and beyond — developers, users, companies, other open source
> > projects and foundations, lawyers, specific country experts, etc.
> 
> How has this worked? Have these people (who?) been asked a specific set
> of questions? Can we see them so that we can consider the same
> questions?  Can we see the feedback itself?
> 
> If you expect the foundation after it's been established to take it into
> consideration at all, it needs to be disclosed, otherwise the first
> revision of the bylaws/constitution might go against this feedback
> entirely, and then it's been a waste of time.

Wow, that is an awesome point.

If there is no open, transparent, detailed historical record of the
rationale for the foundation structure, then the foundation may choose
to make future structural changes without the benefit of the original
rationale.

Us hackers are well used to this with code and have all sorts of
techniques - e.g. code clarity, code comments, commit messages, detailed
bug reports, unit tests, mail/irc archives, etc. - to build up a body of
information that is invaluable to future hackers trying to understand
subtle decisions made by past hackers.

Cheers,
Mark.