Re: Stable branch will freeze.

[Marius Vollmer]

Thien-Thi Nguyen <address@hidden> writes:

>    From: Marius Vollmer <address@hidden>
>    Date: 15 Mar 2002 20:54:44 +0100
> 
>    Please reconsider.  It would be sad to lose your contributions, but I
>    think we could manage.
> 
> of course everyone can manage (to varying degrees), that's not the
> point.  the point is that declarations of power [...]

My motivation was not to demonstrate or gain power but to take more
responsibility.  I should have explained myself better when announcing
the decision.

I can now see that the way I announced my decision to really, finally
and utterly freeze the 1.6 branch pissed off the people who were
actively improving it.  I didn't intent this, of course, and I'm sorry
about that.  For me, it was a technical decision that should clarify
the status of the 1.6 branch and help it to fulfill its intended
purpose.

Maybe we should have discussed it first, but I knew from the way the
1.6 branch has developed that we would need to be really strict about
the freeze if it should have a chance of succeeding.  So I just went
ahead and demonstrated my willingness to be strict by just announcing
that the branch is now frozen, period.

> are not as constructive as recording (somewhere): your policy, your
> plan, your work-in-progress, your requests for help or collaboration
> (if needed), and your general openness to feedback.  some of these
> can be informally recorded (like in mailing list archives), some are
> more useful when detailed in a special place that encourages review
> and update.

Sometimes it helps just to do things instead of talking about them.

> if anyone has read this far, they might be wondering, what is the point
> asking for write privs removal?  well, the nature of guile (and any free
> software) collaborative effort is that there is really no such thing as
> removing write privs to the source (people just snarf the repo and hack
> local source).  the question was an attempt to determine your policy and
> maturity level, so as to be able to fine-tune my trust model and plan
> for your actions.

Thanks for letting me know.  What did you deduce from my response?