I feel that the marketing and general information about dotLRN should be on the dotLRN site but the technical and development areas should be on the openacs.org site (as posted above and in the other thread). OpenACS and dotLRN should not drift apart.
-Carl
Going back to the really early threads on this topic (pre-dating even the dotLRN bboard), we consistently made a distinction between technical and non-technical "users" (i.e., developers and end users). I think this distinction is wise.
-Michael
We need to find ways to divorce code from product and technology from marketing. I think it is clear that governance of each of these "sectors" should be divorced from one another.
If I understand the core of Neophytos' concerns they are that somehow technical governance will become subservient to marketing governance. Valid and important concerns.
I feel like the GPL takes care of this. There is no reason that, if dotLRN were to be hosted on openacs.org, ther might not be two developer communities cooperating... a bunch of dotLRN marketing subservient developers contributing code to the core. And a bunch of other independant developers contributing code to the core.
This scenario is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more likely to be possible if dotLRN code is clearly part of the OACS community by being a project subsite of openacs.org
