To a degree, having for-profit companies so closely tied to a non-profit open source project is problematic. I think it easily lends itself to a lot of conspiracies being developed. This idea of a 'secret room' where Automatic, 10Up and HumanMade huddle around, decide what they need, and then make it so, is very easy to dream up. When there are companies whose profits could depend on specific needs, those needs could easily be pushed to the top of the pile [cough Calypso cough]. This is not to say that those needs will not benefit everyone in a remarkable way. But it ends up seeming like the power structure can quickly get stacked in a 'non-open' way.

WordPress powers so much of the web, it needs strong leadership to help filter out the things that would break it. It needs people to say no to the daily 'let me tell you how wrong you are about meta' proposals from people who are thinking about an issue from a single usage/system/technology standpoint. Or to tell someone who wants to rewrite the entirety of WordPress by themselves not to waste their time. For every one beneficial idea that makes its way into core, I'm sure there are 20 proposals from the internet version of a man protesting in a H&R Block parking lot. It needs a top level group of decision makers to filter what benefits all over what benefits a few, and make sure it works for everyone.

To that end, a project of this scale needs to have vision. And maybe the issue is that the vision is seeming a little blurry at the moment. Or that the vision is in the hands of specific people/organizations/companies and not the greater 'open' community.

The solution may be a matter of increased transparency. Maybe a voting system ala the StackOverflow moderator idea. Release-lead nominees make a case for what they want to include, what their intentions and experience are, how it will tie in with existing release schedules, what they see as the future of WP, etc. The community votes, leads are chosen. Repeat four months later.

Just a thought. It's obviously not that simple - people would have to be vetted somehow (minimum Trac involvement, signed petitions, etc.), proposals would have to be vetted to make sure they are attainable, etc.

But some form of transparency/public discussion/documented vision, rather than just a lead announcement at WCUS, could be very beneficial.

--

I should note, I'm typically a lurker and never a commenter. So I feel bad just jumping in on this post, and just want to say that everything about this project is amazing. It's free, it's incredibly extensive, people are pouring ideas and sweat into the project from everywhere in the world, and that is absolutely incredible!!. Thanks to everyone who has put a moment of thought or a keystroke into WP, and thanks to core devs/commiters/leads for dealing with 25% of internet users.