For the most part, I think Don is right. I find all this talk about steering commitees, bylaws, regulations, new leadership etc. rather irritating, but it hasen't really slowed me down with respect to making progress on the port.
As far as leadership, I think we're damn lucky to have somebody of Don's caliber leading the project. I've been involved in many projects over the course of my engineering career, and I think Don rates among the best in this arena. Nobody, other than Ben, has done as much, or worked as hard to make the openacs project a success. I would really be interested to know who else in the community considers themselves more worthy to lead the project than Don and Ben? Who else has done as much for the project? Who has even come close?
These discussions haven't really hurt the progress of the port, because most of the people doing the talking aren't actually contributing anything to the port. It's kind of funny isn't it, that in general, the people that are demanding the greatest change are doing the least to make it happen, while the people that are contributing the most, are for the most part, happy with how the project is being managed.
That's not to say that some things shouldn't change, and I think the one good thing that has come from these discussions in the realization that the way to make a difference is to contribute. Musea caught on to that concept rather quickly, so why is it that so many others are having such a hard time with the concept?
Usually, I avoid these types of discussions, because nothing much ever comes of them. Alot of talk, some wasted energy, a few bruised egos, and then in the end the discussion sputters out with anything changing. If only a handful of the people here come away from these discussions with the idea that contributing to the project is the correct path for changing the project and gaining influence over the course of the project, then I'll consider these discussions a huge success.
