Le 18/07/2018 à 19:51, Barry Warsaw a écrit :
On Jul 18, 2018, at 01:43, Antoine Pitrou antoine@python.org wrote:
Why do you think non-BDFL projects have a problem with """ambiguity as to the authority of said decision"""? What is your basis for that assertion?
With more people empowered to make a binding decision as part of a Supreme Council, there will be more uncertainty in the authority of the person pronouncing.
I don't really follow you. If you have a collegial body (a Council), it's the Council as a whole that has the authority to pronounce. Not any singular member of the Council (unless the Council functions as a miniature monarchy, that is). So the "person pronouncing" is the Council.
(Imagine a parliamentary regime: when a parliament decides on a law, it's the parliament's authority that makes the law valid in the eyes of every citizen. It does not matter which representatives exactly voted on a given piece of law.)
Of one thing I have absolutely no doubt: no decision in Python will ever be unanimous! That kind of proves my point as to why a singular leader is necessary. :)
That doesn't prove anything. A dictator is not needed to make up for the lack of unanimity (fortunately! otherwise we would all live under dictatorships...).
You're creating a huge problem here. Whatever dictator you come up with, not everyone will be ok with that choice. What are they supposed to do? If one doesn't think X is legitimate as a dictator, how does one keep contributing to the project? In other words, you are threatening to exclude people, perhaps seasoned contributors.
How is that any different with a Supreme Council rather than a singular leader? Whatever makeup of the Council we come up with, not everyone will be okay with those choices. What are they supposed to do?
Well, there is a large difference between a dictator-for-life and, for example, a collegial body that gets renewed from time to time. The latter is probably easier to compromise with, even for those who don't like its makeup.
Regards
Antoine.