From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New maintainer Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:25:46 +0300 Message-ID: <83d1wv3gat.fsf@gnu.org> References: <5610207A.2000300@harpegolden.net> <83h9m73hkd.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1443900377 4705 80.91.229.3 (3 Oct 2015 19:26:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:26:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 03 21:26:09 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSRZ-0000A2-Mc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 21:26:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39764 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSRU-0002Ie-5b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:26:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33133) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSRR-0002IS-DQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:25:58 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSRM-0004uH-F2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:25:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:55811) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSRM-0004uB-76 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:25:52 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NVN00M00S2B1U00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:25:51 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NVN00L5MSN2TQA0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:25:51 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:190813 Archived-At: > From: John Wiegley > Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 12:12:42 -0700 > > >>>>> John Wiegley writes: > > > It's the only way to break a tie if there is vehement difference of opinion. > > I didn't say it was the only way to make decisions. > > There's another reason not to use a Cabal-of-3, though, Eli: it would mean > always waiting until you could consult with the other 2 before making > pronouncements about direction on the mailing list. Otherwise, you risk the > possibility of deciding something that the other two don't agree with. This > would add unnecessary inertia to the process, in my opinion. What's the rush? This isn't some military operation we are planning, where any delay might cause a catastrophe. Besides, I see no reason to believe that any of the maintainers would become incommunicado for long periods without an advance warning. Being available on short notice should be part of the job description. > I say this having participated in group-driven scenarios before. It does slow > things down, since you have to communicate first with the group (either on or > off list), and then with the community. And there's the matter of presenting a > united front, being clear on what is personal opinion and what is the opinion > of the group, etc. The good feeling of being part of the team and having your opinions heard and seriously considered, rather than dismissed, might be worth the delay.