I do think we should keep .LRN. Both .LRN as the configuration of OpenACS and .LRN as the consortium.
>I think we need to view ourselves as a single project, instead of OpenACS and .LRN. Having two governances, two releases, two installers, two communities, two brands, etc. is not workable. We should be a single project, a single community, and a single brand.
* Yes, we should view the software development as a single project - OpenACS.
* We should have one technical leadership team - the OpenACS Core Team.
* We should have one release management process. Right now, we have it that the OpenACS focuses on core and the .LRN focueses on some of the packages. Everything should be under OpenACS release management.
.LRN does have value as a brand. The .LRN community of educational institutions focusing how to use this software in education does have value.
