community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jed Smith <...@jedsmith.org>
Subject Re: When would Jira be up ?
Date Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:43:03 GMT
That policy applies to the private lists of PMCs, such as
libcloud-private. I do not believe in spirit that policy should apply
to committers@ -- and, it most likely doesn't. While committers@ is
indeed "private", it is not a PMC private list which I believe that
policy is discussing.

Infra is not violating anything. GSoC is obviously a special case, but
I'd assert that it's the responsibility of mentors to keep their
students aware of what is going on. Just don't quote committers@ to do
it, is the only rub.

Let's not get carried away going after Infra when there was a
breakdown of communication between a mentor and his student, they have
enough on their plate as it is.



On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Konstantin Kolinko
<knst.kolinko@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/8/13 Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>:
>> I think there are two separate problems here,
>>
>> 1) Given that an update was sent to committers@, is it ok to quote it or
>> summarise it or mention its existence or non of the above
>>
>> 2) Where should updates be sent to
>>
>>
>> The latter is being debated on infra-dev@.  The former I'm unhappy with
>> quoting a committers@ annoucement wholesale, that doesn't set a good
>> precedent for that (private) list.
>>
>
> There is a policy in ASF,
> http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#mailing-list-naming-policy
>
> [quote]
> All PMCs SHALL restrict their communication on private mailing lists
> to only issues that cannot be discussed in public such as:
>
>     Discussion of
>
>         pre-disclosure security problems
>
>         pre-agreement discussions with third parties that require
> confidentiality
>
>         nominees for project, project committee or Foundation membership
>
>         personal conflicts among project personnel
> [/quote]
>
> So I think that Infra members violate the above policy and abuse the
> committers list, in the cases when the information is none of the
> above.  The main motivation, I suspect, is that subscription to that
> list is mandatory and it is the easiest way to distribute this
> information to the most of the target audience.
>
> I just point that committers are not the only users of ASF services.
> From community building point of view, it is bad to leave other
> contributors in the dark.
>
> This is not the first time when people ask on public dev@ lists  and
> one has nowhere to point to publicly.  I think if such announcements
> were dubbed by blog posts, it would solve the problem.
>
>
> I could reply to OP in my own words, but I thought that doing that
> will misrepresent the situation. My apologies.
>
> Best regards,
> Konstantin Kolinko
>
>> Katherine Marsden wrote on Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 07:39:49 -0700:
>>> On 8/11/2012 11:07 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>> >Konstantin Kolinko wrote on Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 20:43:56 +0400:
>>> >>2
>>> >>The below is a quote from the e-mail that was sent to the committers@
>>> >>mailing list yesterday by Tony Stevenson of the Apache Infrastructure
>>> >>Team. I see that you are not an ASF committer, so you probably have
>>> >>not seen it.
>>> >Don't quote publicly stuff sent to private lists.
>>> >
>>> To what extent can/should committers communicate critical
>>> infrastructure updates to other contributors?  Certainly it is
>>> important to everyone, (most critically right now to GSoC students
>>> like Siddharth  who face the suggested pencils down date today). Is
>>> there a public place where non-committers can check for this
>>> information?  I think http://monitoring.apache.org/status/ would be
>>> a great place to put this type of notice or just a note at the
>>> bottom of the emails that it is ok to share with affected dev groups
>>> would probably be ok.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> KAthey
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>



-- 
Jed Smith
jed@jedsmith.org

Mime
View raw message