Never said easy. That’s why I put a lot of importance on governance and bring it often. When did you plan to talk about this transition? This must be handled before the deal. Still, we do not know many things. So many problems start from here.
We don’t have to be friends or sisters to contribute to a software project. I am worried that there is so much emotional response here. Some are sincere I believe, but some are not. Then I tell you to keep it professional. Rules, well-defined responsibilities, acknowledging different goals/motivations to contribute, and institutional structure… Especially responsibilities I emphasized a lot.
However, I must protect myself from personal attacks here as the moderation has not shown a professional attitude since the beginning. I am milder than anyone who is trying to police my tone including moderators. So I will kindly ask you to contact moderators if you see a problem with my tone.
For second class tasks (maintenance, quality assurance), I said the criticism is, and must be, harsher compared to feature requests as the whole community would be affected negatively by those universal problems. Therefore, the responsibility for these tasks cannot be assigned to individuals but to institutional structures. The concept of limited liability is there to protect individuals. Said many times, my criticism is always directed at the Foundation. But you take them personally because the necessary separation between institutional functions and personas is not established in the community. I do not get the impression that the Foundation is aware of the depth of the problem or maybe they prefer that way.
I read a news about the two-person Foundation this week. That was the news to me.