On 03/10/2011 11:13 PM, R P Herrold wrote: > The suggestion by a relative newcomer that the project would > fall apart from a lack of depth or interest of developers, > seems to me to be just another troll Are you referring to me? If so, that's not what I said; not that the project will fall apart and certainly not from a lack of depth or interest of developers. What I said was that the project would benefit from more openness and from the involvement of more people, and that a broader involvement would also give better guarantees for the project's long-term future. As for trolling, let me remind you of this in case you forgot: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2009-July/079767.html Inflammatory language and name-calling does not make your argument; it breaks it. In any case, this whole discussion is moving in rather inconsistent ways. I mean, you can't at the same time (a) boast serving 8 million unique machines worldwide, (b) be 4 months and counting behind upstream, (c) be so protective of your project that you just dodge offers for help and (d) two months later also claim that the project has all the manpower that it needs (see links at the bottom). Any one or two of these statements would be valid, but not all four at the same time. Apart from that, it is completely up to the owners of the project how they want to organise it and manage it, but it is also common knowledge that openly managed projects thrive more than closed ones. I'm not talking about democracy here, let alone consensus; I'm just talking about creating coherence and involvement by letting people know what is happenning, how, when and why and by letting them contribute instead of brushing them off. To quote from the link above: "Please do not kill CentOS through your fear of shared management of the project". Please take a good look at the signatures below that statement. With that said, I don't see much of a point in carrying this discussion further. If a discussion is not constructive, then it better not be at all. Z (a) http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2011-February/006935.html (b) http://www.redhat.com/about/news/prarchive/2010/new-standard.html (c) http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2011-January/006558.html (d) http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2011-March/007087.html