Re: IDL namespacing ...

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>]

Michael Meeks <michael helixcode com> writes:

> 
> 	What makes you think that a sub-committee is neccessary here ? we
> cannot enforce a naming scheme on people. Since I identified the problem,
> audited all the GNOME IDL I could find, brought it to peoples attention
> and started co-ordinating the remedy; what makes you believe that it is
> neccessary to replace my ( what can really only be strongly worded advise
> to module authors [1] ) with a 'subcomittee'.
> 
> 	What did I do wrong ? / why do we need 3 people to do such an
> uncontroversial job / why do you not trust me to continue to do it ?
> 

I think you have been doing a good job bringing this issue to people's
attention and managing the list (other than asking people to change
IDL for released stable modules). I would likely recommend you to be
one or all of the people in charge of administering the namespace to
start with. Please continue doing so in the meantime.

I am sure the namespace issue will grow to encompass more than just
IDL at some point, and may at some point overlap with other standards
the Foundation will work on in the future, so I'd rather have the
right process for these kinds of things in place straight off.

I think this is a task somewhat similar to managing the GNOME
Foundation membership rolls, and the Membership Committee has done a
fine job there, without imposing unnecessary beurocracy.

 - Maciej