[Dbix-class] 4/5 Why Matt's proposal is a farce

[Jess Robinson]

On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 18:27:03 +0100, Peter Rabbitson  
<rabbit+dbic at rabbit.us> wrote:

> On 10/07/2016 08:40 PM, David Golden wrote:
>>>
>>> [...] I have grave reservations about the specific (now) 4-member team
>>> outlined by Matt. The reservations are entirely technical and  
>>> procedural
>>> in nature [...] I will elaborate on these reservations if necessary
>>
>> As above, I think hearing your reservations and the rationale behind
>> them would be valuable input.  It's clear from the comments from the
>> community so far that stability (however defined) is important to many.
>> Your thoughts on what would and wouldn't work will help shape the
>> discussion of future governance.
>
>
> - ilmari: Decidedly another "ehthusiast". Great at proposing and  
> implementing low-hanging-fruit fixups. Yet loses interest whenever the  
> problem space required a more in-depth solution.
>
> - castaway: Openly decries DBIC[8] for being unlike "... other
> bits of CPAN, apart from maybe the ones in core, that attempt to be as
> rigorous in their perfection"
>
> - frew: True, the only person in the entire thread so far to echo my  
> understanding of "stability"[9]. Has a very mature approach to software  
> engineering, and while having "enthusiast" leanings as well is able to  
> recognize when it is time to put his tools down. On the down-side: has  
> (understandably) no patience for pesky squabbles, and has expressed  
> unambiguously his involvement won't be "what it used to be"[10]
>

.. If anyone wonders why I've been quiet, this may help explain it... This  
is difficult to reply to, so this is as much as you're going to get.

Jess