[arch-dev-public] discussions to death, rules - no innovations?

[Andreas Radke]

In the last few weeks I've seen so many threads about rules and votings
we want to give ourself(e.g repo destinctions and repo dividing lines,
pkg signoff, iso naming, package movements, license issues, cvs
move,...).

Wasn't it the big advantage to trust the ArchLinux developers that made
it fast growing and bleading edge with an acceptable level of
instability? 

I still like to decide myself what and when to move packages into the
repos or when to remove them. Now I have to ask and wait for other devs
to signoff packages even for minor bugfixes. And that for two
architectures.

Didn't we elect Mr. T to become the release manager to let him
decide what to do?

Now with all the discussions to death and often no actions following
- see orphans and cleanup - I loose some of the Arch feeling. All
these coming rules seem to slow us down more and more without finding
new skilled manpower. 

I'm sure we all only want the best for ArchLinux but is that
the right way? Some rules are always ok. But I have the feeling we are
on the way to become somewhat of an overcontrolled and superduper
planned Debian.

Don't you feel the same?

Andy