Just a couple of observations on this discussion..
 
I see that some advocates of VDR repository are calling Myth project 'bloated',
'kitchen sink', 'not alternative to VDR'…, but, at the same time, they 
are pushing VDR project the same way, which will virtually transform VDR 
into sort of Myth-2, because the most important advantages of VDR can persist 
only as long as Klaus has fun, hence motivation to continue development 
of his great project. And he clearly stated that collective development way 
is not appropriate to his own development style and his view on how VDR 
project should be managed. 
 
> Well ok, we all expect open source development
> to be driven by personal need, but it is the combination of code created by
> many people who each had their own needs which is where the magic lies.
 
Again, why do we need Myth-2 if we already have Myth-1 incorporating all 
the mentioned magic.. 
 
> A well maintained bazaar-style project is generally
> thought to produce much higher quality code. Look at the Linux kernel
> and compare it to any other operating system.
 
Linux kernel development is a good example of the fact that greatness of 
a project is dependant in the first place on the person who leads the project. 
Importance of the chosen tool (community tree, or something else) is in the  
second place. Collective development via repository, or single coder ruling 
- this is just a tool that the project leaders have fun and convenience 
to use for their projects. A lot of projects use community tree as 
their tool of development, but it doesn’t necessarily guarantee to them so high 
level of appreciation that Linux kernel has, for example..