Jim,

> At 02:59 PM 6/07/2004 -0400, Jim Starkey wrote:
> >I have recent become aware that the closed Firebird-admin list has
> >become an architectural forum. I, for one, think this is a very bad

way

> >to run an open source project. Decent architecture, whether close or
> >open source, requires full, open, critical discussion by project
> >participants.
>
> Helen Borrie replied:
>
> Huh? Any examples?

I am pleased to report that you (Jim) are mistaken.

I have done a scan of the admin postings for the last 8 months and can
report that NO architectural discussions/decisions are taking place on
this list.

> >Jim Starkey wrote:
> >This project has an unfortunate history of people thinking that
> >technical decisions can and should be made in private, then announced

to

> >world as a fait accompli.

That is a broad statement which does not fairly reflect the history of
the project.

Can some examples be found? Yes, certainly.

Should everything (with some very specific exceptions) be discussed in
public view? Of course!


I know that one of the reasons for discussions taking place "in
secret"/Off-lists is that none of the current lists allow for engine
coders to discuss without the flotsam/jetsam of the "lookie loos".

This list has 769 members with the Devel list having the same, but there
are not 50 people who have bothered to read any of the engine code, let
alone the 20-30 people who have actually done real work. Yet, there are
a large number of people who will venture their opinion on subjects they
know absolutely nothing!

Life is too short to have to "fight" your way through the 50 useless
postings to get to the 1 message which really matters.


Perhaps a separate list is required, with restricted postings but public
viewing/reading.

> >Jim Starkey wrote:
> >I have no objection to the admin list being closed for posting, but I
> >object strenuously to a tiny number of individuals presuming to make
> >architectural decisions in secret that are presumably binding on the
> >rest of the project.

If that were happening, I would agree, but this isn't.

>
> Helen Borrie replied:
> There's no reason to keep Admin
> proceedings secret and the fact that current proceedings are not

available

> at Atkin has nothing to do with a desire for secrecy and everything to

do

> with inertia and vacations.

Helen, I don't agree that the Admin posting should be public. There are
plenty of times where privacy has been required.

I do agree that, as much as possible, discussions should be held in a
public forum.


Sean