Re: [gopher] History and future of "the gopher project"
> > Although I respect (and in some ways wouldn't mind) a central planning
> > process for Gopher, I think that makes what is for many of us a fun sideline
> > unnecessarily bureaucratic.
>
> This is a good point: bureaucracy shouldn't evolve!
> But what could be bureaucratic? People could work/play on as they used to do.
In that case, what would such a central approach solve? Perhaps I don't
understand clearly what you're proposing. It sounded like a W3C-like
consortium, and I think the W3C's drawbacks have become rather apparent.
Based on this,
> What could be constraining and for whom?
> For example: If there was a guide on how to setup Bucktooth which(the guide)
> has been developed and was maintained by "the gopher project" anyone could
> write h[is|er] own guide or propose changes or whatever. In which way could
> this be constaining?
It seems more like you're actually proposing a central resource or repository
for this data, which doesn't really need anyone's permission ...
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser@floodgap.com
-- Born free. Taxed to death. -------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gopher-Project mailing list
Gopher-Project@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gopher-project
Reply to: