I guess the expriment ended up pretty much the same. The same thing happened on OACS rpm.
Lets take step back. We all want to move the toolkit forward. But we also want to move it properly. Why not have the sponsoring company do some real hard specs. Submit to community... rehash until the design is acceptable. During this phase, for us to collaborate effectively we will need to make good documentation. Then we just bid the implementors.
That way we can already make the docs, design, use cases, etc. prior to implementation, which normally takes a back seat once its implemented. Maybe this way things will be more documented and better.
Or maybe what we need is to have the concerned parties work together openly. Like S&R will surely need this feature so they open up their development and see if people or other companies will contribute. The finished code may or not be accepted on OACS tree.
I really don't exactly know what will work. Malte maybe rethink on how you would like to do this again. The goal of a company maybe different from the goal of the community. That is why we have the problem of code not being returned back because company have deadlines. Company code and/or design are more crappy than OSS code in general.
But I think what you are doing may have some value to it. Maybe it just needs to be rethink. Please try again and who knows it might work the next time.
