[Dbix-class] GOVERNANCE: Aggregation and conclusion

David Golden xdg at xdg.me
Mon Oct 31 15:22:32 GMT 2016


On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Andrew Beverley <andy at andybev.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 10:12:27 -0400 David Golden <xdg at xdg.me> wrote:
> > So to be absolutely clear, it sounds like proposal "B" is to grant
> > Peter the unilateral power initially in dispute.
> >
> > I.e. he could – on arbitrary day N after your proposal is adopted –
> > merge his remaining work, transfer permissions to an unknown person
> > with an unknown mandate, and retire (aka. the original "project
> > freeze" plan).
>
> Yes, correct, just like lots of other "upstream" module maintainers
> could do the same.
>
> Like I say, I personally trust him not to cause such a train-smash


Please read the section entitled "=== Future Plans" in this message from
Peter: http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.modules/2016/10/msg96174.html

What I suggested was not a hypothetical "train-smash" intended to scare you
or others.  It was literally his plan for DBIC as of Oct 1.

In making your proposal "B", you are indicating that you support that
specific plan if that's what Peter decides is best for DBIC now or at any
point in the future.

Again, I have no objections if the DBIC community gives informed consent to
such a plan.  Speaking personally, I can understand the appeal of such
certainty around stability.

I, too, look forward to Peter's thoughts, as perhaps his thinking on the
matter has evolved since a month ago.

Regards,
David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/dbix-class/attachments/20161031/574b31a6/attachment.htm>


More information about the DBIx-Class mailing list