A quick summary of my plan, as it seems to have been forgotten or ignored: I
was trying to solve *only* the *technology* governance problem, as
specifically instructed by Al. The immediate goal which was communicated to
me by Al and Carl was "we need to know that Lars can build
internationalization, that MuseaTech can submit bug reports and patches,
without having to go through OpenForce approval or engineers." That is the
problem I was trying to solve, and I believe I presented a fairly simple plan for
this that tried to impose the smallest necessary amount of process.
It is my belief that 3 committees of people with wildly varying goals trying to
manage a small kernel of code is a recipe for disaster.
That said, I don't own the dotLRN trademark and I have no say in this. I'm
thankful to Al for allowing me to express my opinion and for releasing dotLRN
to the public under the GPL. These are important moves and they indeed
show a desire to involve the community - and that's a good thing.
I believe it is clear that my proposal has been rejected by the community, and
there is little need to let this degenerate any more than it already has. I look
forward to seeing the composition of these various boards.
