I think the mention of a steering committee and some sort of delegation and ease of community
picking up the tasks that they are interested in are desired by the community as a whole.
How is this anything short of replacing the current leadership of the OpenACS project with new leadership, i.e. this steering committee?
If the community as a whole is looking for this, then presumably the community as a whole wants the current leadership to step down.
I know, I'm raising a strawman again. Forming a steering committee and giving it control over the OpenACS project isn't the same as asking the current leadership to cede control over OpenACS project.
At least, that's what Ben and I are told whenever we say that, sure, we'll step down if that's what folks want.
I honestly do not see how putting control of the OpenACS project into the hands of a steering committee isn't the same as kicking Ben and Don out of the saddle, though. Could you please explain the difference to me?
If you have a definition that is truly different, are you sure that
others who favor this step share it?
Don't get me wrong, if the community as a whole does want a leadership change, I won't stand in the way. I should hope I made that clear in the thread which led you to dedicate this thread to Jerry Asher.
But if that's what folks want, don't beat around the bush. Let's talk about it openly with no attempt to sugar-coat the real meaning of
such a change.
