On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 06:30:12PM +0100, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:

> I hope we don't need such a committee. First we should try to seek a
> consensus. I suppose this will almost always be successful, and over
> time we will have a situation where the voices of some people will have
> more weight than the voices of others, simply because they are naturally
> respected.
> 
> So I would suggest to postpone such a committee until it is really
> needed, when everything else failed.

Yes. As a veteran of many committees (though in a very different context
than this), I can testify that the structure and process of an
organization can far too easily become an occupation in itself. If you
have to decide how to form a committee, well that leads (backward) to
the need to decide how to decide ... and surely one of the reasons Open
Source has been so successful is that formal organization has been kept
to a minimum, making it very easy for motivated people to get involved.

-- 
Matt Gushee                 When a nation follows the Way,
Englewood, Colorado, USA    Horses bear manure through
mgushee@havenrock.com           its fields;
http://www.havenrock.com/   When a nation ignores the Way,
                            Horses bear soldiers through
                                its streets.
                                
                            --Lao Tzu (Peter Merel, trans.)

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners