community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konstantin Boudnik <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Incubating, Graduating & Code of conduct @ The ASF (spin-off of Better specifying....)
Date Mon, 06 Jul 2015 17:57:48 GMT
Just to point to the source of my confusiony. My impression came from this part:

> > > Like expressed earlier, that loosely way of interpreting ASF guidelines has
> > > led to the situation that the board charges newly established projects to
> > > define its bylaws. Charges that are then disregarded by the project and not
> > > followed up on by the board and or the appointed VP of the project.

The subsequent colorful passage about the snowflake led me to believe that
you're indeed found a way to prevent said snowflake from landing on the top of
the mountain. Looks like my interpretation of the meaning of it was quite
suboptimal. Thanks for the explanation, Pierre.

Cos

On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 08:47PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> Hi Konstantin,
> 
> No, I am not saying that, neither explicitly nor effectively. Thus no, not
> a correct representation of the point of discussion. Maybe you got that
> impression (regarding blanket bylaws, or projects going off the handle) by
> reading the postings of others.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Pierre
> 
> Op maandag 6 juli 2015 heeft Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org> het
> volgende geschreven:
> 
> > Let me see if I read you right, Pierre. Effectively, you're saying that
> > imposing a blanket bylaws system should help to prevent some rare cases of
> > established projects going off the handle? Is this a correct
> > representation of
> > the point of this discussion?
> >
> > I am not as eloquent as you're in painting the picture of the law-less
> > land,
> > thus please accept my apologies in advance if I came to the wrong
> > conclusions.
> >
> > With best regards,
> >   Cos
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 01:34PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> > > Like expressed earlier, that loosely way of interpreting ASF guidelines has
> > > led to the situation that the board charges newly established projects to
> > > define its bylaws. Charges that are then disregarded by the project and not
> > > followed up on by the board and or the appointed VP of the project.
> > >
> > > It is such that makes the determination of 'doing the right thing, doing
> > it
> > > the right way' less credible in stead of more. The show flake falling
> > down
> > > at the top of the mountain creates the avalanche in the valley.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Pierre Smits
> > >
> > > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > > Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > > Services and Retail & Trade
> > > http://www.orrtiz.com
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> > bdelacretaz@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Pierre Smits <pierre.smits@gmail.com
> > <javascript:;>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > ...The latest posting by Jan proves the point of the necessity of
> > good
> > > > > per-project bylaws when it comes to deviating from the generic
> > guidelines
> > > > > of the ASF...
> > > >
> > > > But as others have said, the best is to stick to those guidelines and
> > > > use the default bylaws, unless it's absolutely necessary to do things
> > > > differently.
> > > >
> > > > -Bertrand
> > > >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Pierre Smits
> 
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com

Mime
View raw message