[Openframeworkwg] OFA OFWG meeting minutes and responses to AR re organizational recommendations

[Hefty, Sean]

> Ok, I suppose that is fair. Let's continue the discussion of agreeing on
> the specifics of the proposed processes and voting rules that Jim sent
> through email.  We should also discuss the processes for submitting code
> (as I assume in the end that there will be some code that is at least one
> of the products of the WG), and for that, I would suggest we stick with the
> open source process that we already use for developing all the rest of the
> OFA SW components. For things like high level requirements and specific
> proposals put forth, we may need to vote to get agreement on proceeding
> forward with a specific proposal or idea.

Personally, I do not want to get into specification design by committee.  I strongly prefer following the open source model of submitting code, discussing its merits, and reaching a consensus among the participating developers.  Voting on code sounds ludicrous to me.

Although I believe a lot of progress can be made over email simply by discussing code, IMO, the working group may be able to move some areas quicker.  (It's difficult to give presentations via email.)  However, it's not clear to me what voting in the working group implies.  Assuming that the primary output from the working group is a software framework, then success depends solely on its adoption.

Working group votes would not bind a vendor to adopt or even support a framework.  So before discussing who should be able to vote and whether a vote requires a majority, 2/3, or 75%, I think it first needs to be defined what exactly the votable items would be.

- Sean