[Axiom-developer] votes

[daly]

The current widespread model is that a project maintains a stable
distribution (Gold) and an unstable distribution (silver). Silver
changes are proposed using diff-Naur patches. Silver commits are
done by a very limited number of people (usually one).

Every other project I'm associated currently associated with, 
every other project I've worked on large (Fedora) or small (Common 
Lisp Library) uses the same model. Even super-large projects like
Linux and Firefox use this model.

GCL, for instance, uses this model. Camm has recently made changes
on the ANSI branch which are distinctly non-ansi (e.g. *safety-level* 4)
and this raises no comment.

Up until November of 2006 I was publishing Axiom Gold releases on a
best-effort, two-month schedule using the same model. It worked 
perfectly well to get us up to the last Gold.

Please explain why you think Axiom should be a democratic model.

Please explain why you feel, as a self-declared algebra developer,
you have a need to vote on machinery (gclweb.lisp) below the algebra
which enables function you will never use.

Tim