Carl ... just for the record ...
<blockquote><i>My definition of a steering committee was more like Postgres's version where there are contributors that heading up different portions of tasks </i></blockquote>
The Postgres Steering Committee grew in exactly the same fashion as the current "group of four gatekeepers" have grown in this community.
<p>
They're the people who started the (modern incarnation of the) project, who provided resources as well as wrote code. The reason you find a sysadmin on the steering committe is due to this history, i.e. he was the guy who got them the physical machine resources for their website, CVS tree, etc. This happened several years ago when you couldn't start up such a project on a $500 PC and a $30/month DSL line, but rather needed real money or resources.
<p>So it may surprise you that *my* model for the evolution of the OpenACS organization is similar to that model.
<p>We could fit that model by changing the name "gatekeepers" to "steering committee".
<p>The Postgres model is a very lightweight model. They're not weighed down with anything near the kind of organizational and formalistic baggage that Jerry's proposing.
<p>And, the steering committee isn't elected, it chooses itself. If we adopted the Postgres model, it wouldn't dilute my influence, it would strengthen it and make moot any decisions regarding it.
<p>That's certainly not Jerry's goal.
<p>Also, let me quote Jerry directly:
<blockquote><i>One: there are a lot of individuals and companies investing their time (read money) into the OpenACS. Investors, and stakeholders usually
have some rights and often ask for some openness and some amount of control. When they don't get that, they start rethinking their
investment decisions</i></blockquote>
If you like the Postgres model, you shouldn't like the implications of this statement.
<p>For the record, both GreatBridge and PostgreSQL, Inc have *explicitly* vowed to not try to influence the direction of Postgres in ways that run counter to the community's desires simply to maximize their chances for financial success. Jerry suggests something different, i.e. that companies that choose to use OpenACS should expect some level of control of the project.
