Uh, don't you think that vbcs would've been one of the first people I contacted? Since he's on the team? You think I chose the most likely person to cause complete disagreement in the community as a first choice? Get real man seriously.
Thanks for the confidence man, me being the last possible choice and all.
As I said it earlier, I no longer want the position. If the community is so important, perhaps they can write the code too.
In fact, we probably can. Most of us are just way too busy writing code for $$$ professionally.
I think we should improve on how the development process works.
1) have a small core group that can accept pull requests, we might already have this, possibly someone besides burstcoin have push priveleges to the github account
2) establish a unit test software suite that thoroughly tests the existing code and interfaces
3) at this point, everyone can create small and big changes to burstcoin, and present it for the core group as a pull request. The pull request can be tested using the unit tests, as well as of course be revieed and test run on the testnet. When the core group finds the change okay ( doesn't break anything ) then they can pull the request into the main branch for the release they want it to appear in.
4) official way for non-developers and developers alike to put in feature and bug requests, discuss them etc. ( github has this, but it has hardly been used, and likely almost none of the burst users know where it is, how to access it)
With something alike to the above, we don't need a lead developer, we just need a lot of developers with a little bit of spare time to each fix whatever they feel like fixing. The core group can develop too, but in fact only need to review and test and make as sure as possible that the code that reaches the main branch is not giving the coin trouble.
the core group will then decide when we have a stable branch, so it can be changed to a release branch and tested further on the testnet.
and the core group will handle the release, resulting in a set of binaries, and sources that whoever manages the bitcointalk initial post can then make links for.
We don't need a core developer doing everything. Much more stable and safe to have a larger group of developers build the coin, each spending whatever time he/she has available.
We already have some features some of us would like to pay for, so it is clearly possible to award a bounty to whoever produces a new feature.
Who knows, with this kind of setup, burstcoin will perhaps still once in a while do some coding for BURST and hand it to us as a pull request. Or he can be part of the core team, and review code when he has time, his input will always be enormously valuable.
If BURST becomes a team effort with a documented software development process, i think investors will see less risk in the project.