Forum .LRN Q&A: Response to Request for Comment: dotLRN Technology Governance

Neophytos, regarding the separation of dotLRN and OpenACS, I don't see anything than anyone has said that implies otherwise. Now, the mechanism of cooperation between the two probably does need to be fleshed out over time, but really, the only concrete issue I've heard voiced was about pushing generalized code that was developed by and paid for by dotLRN consortium members down into the OpenACS core. Most of the disagreement on this issue took place between two of the people you have nominated in your post, and the precident-setting resolution was to push code down into the OpenACS core  whenever (a) it makes technical sense to do so and (b) the OpenACS leadership decides they think it's right for OpenACS.

Regarding the issue of OpenACS nominating its own board members, well, you can ask, but you certainly have no right to demand. The GPL says MIT has the Freedom to do whatever they hell they want to with OpenACS code without consulting you, whether you like it or not, so long as they don't sell it. So any cooperation here--in both directions--is strictly voluntary. As Don says, I think you'll find that the TAB *will* reflect a serious attempt on MIT's part to actively engage the OpenACS leadership.

Regarding the allegation that multiple people were asked to be quiet, there were two people who made such claims. One of them was you, Neophytos. The other was Stephen Deasey in response to a private email that I sent him. As I noted earlier, I vehemently deny asking him to keep quiet. I did not ask him to do *anything* other than look at my user profile before casting aspersions on my motivations. If he wants to share that email with you, either publicly or privately, fine. It's a shame, though, that your level of trust is so low that it has to come to this.

And I happen to agree with Don: Regardless of how you feel regarding these various issues of substance, your overheated rhetoric is, to say the least, unhelpful and ungracious. You can attribute the words to somebody else, but you were the one who decided to post them in this context.