<HTML>
<BODY>
Salve!<br>
<br>
A couple of observations: <br>
<br>
Unfortunately most foundations are built on a corporate model, and corporations are not democratic by nature. I think we can do better than a raw corporate model. I looked at the list of Chris' suggestions, and they looked to have mature projects, like wine, on it.<br>
<br>
>I really would prefer Koha to be controlled by a democratic foundation<br>
>instead of a self-perpetuating one. There are risks to democracy, but<br>
>at least if it stuffs up, it's the whole community's responsibility.<br>
>Both SFC nor DSpace look undemocratic to me, appointing barons for<br>
>life to rule over their serf projects.<br>
><br>
<br>
And how is this behaviour different from the secret invitation only mailing lists we've been hearing about? Is secrecy called for in a tiny project that as far as I would know would never have a burden that would warrant pitch blackness? Business to business talks ought be just that; I fail to see why it's necessary to drag the Koha name into a single business or two. Just as I fail to see why trademarking under a single or couple of corporations is beneficial. It is imperative that this school boy secrecy be ended now or risk perpetuating a good ole boy network. <br>
I don't think it's the concentration of power in an individual that's given to harm, bodies such as Congress are equally given to corruption. It's the loss of direction, neutrality, and response to feedback that is the source of the rot.<br>
<br>
<br>
>Anyway, this is all moot: LibLime are working on something and we're<br>
>waiting to see what they propose.<br>
><br>
<br>
Why is it that things are more and more often rendered moot by unilateral action taken by LibLime when those actions have not reflected the will of the community? My problem is that they *aren't* proposing things to this list in sunlight. If they have good ideas, wonderful. Folks have offered help on numerous different aspects of the project at different times and have been sluffed off. I'd rather not encourage that model. I'm not saying that LibLime hasn't offered a substantial contribution to the community, and I don't want to belittle their responsibilities, but one corpo should not hold a project hostage. We risk changing the basket from being carried by all to being carried by one. That cedes our fundamental strength.<br>
Rather, I think we should start taking formal votes with reasonable announced time frames. Hopefully this will come to pass with feedback being opened on bugzilla or projects like the one that's currently up to allow for voting for Koha con. I'm also not sure why the trademarks are in corporate hands when we have established users groups that are certainly more objective.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Brooke<br>
<br>
</BODY></HTML>