I don't feel as strongly about voting issues as Talli does, though I generally agree with his points.
I do, however, think that this process looks awfully bureacratic. My first impression when I read it was that very few people are going to want to go through all that to contribute their code. After thinking it over for several days I still feel that way, plus I'm worried about bottlenecks. Having every bug fix reviewed means a *lot* of time spent on a task which is not really rewarding for anyone. I've been through this before on other projects and it always ends up at the bottom of people's todo lists, especially when there is paying work to be done.
I understand and even mostly agree with the reasons for wanting more structure. I realize that right now the project is not as organized or directed as it could be, and that we don't have enough safeguards to keep bad code out. But in the long run we will not benefit from a process that causes the project to stagnate because everyone keeps their work to themselves, either.
I don't have a competing proposal to make - I guess my main reason for posting is to find out if I'm the only one who feels this way? If so, I will consider myself outvoted and sit down quietly. :) But if anyone else shares my concerns, now is the time to speak up, before anything is really set in stone.
