corinthia-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: time for our first "board" report.
Date Wed, 31 Dec 2014 19:41:16 GMT
Minor technicality: It's our first Incubator report.

  -- replying below to --
From: jan i [] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2014 09:03
To:; Dennis Hamilton
Subject: Re: time for our first "board" report.

On 31 December 2014 at 17:32, Dennis E. Hamilton <>

> The copied material below is very difficult to follow.  I find it more
> useful to look at the material in the form it is in at
> <>.
If we agree on it, I can add my suggestions to the wiki. I was just
hesitating to make "my" wording public, before the community at large had
their say.

   It is easier to see it in context, and those new to this can see
   how other podlings work out their reports.

> Questions:
>  1. When must this be completed and signed off so the shepherd can
>     add remarks, mentors can sign off, and it is available on time
>     for inclusion in the IPMC report to the board?
If you look at the top of the wiki page, you will see (extract):

January 7, report due.
January 11, shepherd review
January 13, mentor signoff

Our shepherd is Raphael Bircher, which some of us know from AOO. I will
contact him directly once we agree on the report.

>  2. This file is available for anyone to edit (committers at least).
>     Is there some objection to having anyone with Incubator Wiki
>     editing rights from also working on this report?  It is unusual
>     in my experience for there to be so much gatekeeping.  (Of
>     course there should be accounting for changes and discussion
>     here.)
I would prefer that we make one edit once we agree. I would NOT like to use
that wiki as our discussion place. Actually I have to say this a bit
stronger, if we all edit that file, I will not edit it.

I strongly feel, we should NOT make our answers available on that wiki
before we agree on the content. I promise for next month our wiki will be
up and running, and then our report will be available there. On OUR wiki I
agree that everybody shall edit directly, and once agreed to ONE PPMC, move
the responses to the incubator Wiki.

I hope the difference between OUR discussion and PUBLIC discussion are
clear...we as a community must be able to discuss freely, without going

   I have never seen a situation where this was a problem.
   I can't imagine it being a problem with the project being so small.
   It is true that if there is disagreement, it should not turn into
   edit wars on the wiki.  It should be discussed on the list.
   My experience is that there is collaborative refinement and it all
   works by effective consensus.
      I am concerned that we're putting too much friction into this
   pretty-straightforward activity.

We have a problem this month, because I have not had enough spare cycles to
make our wiki available, hence the "rescue" procedure. If needed I can
extract the question, and my suggested answer.

   Please do.

   I don't understand the quandary here.  
   I am concerned that there is too much gate-keeping and that
   makes the gate-keeper a bottleneck.
   I'm not certain what is being rescued either.  There are 7 days
   to work this out.

@dennis please read my words positively, because in essence I agree with
transparency....but towards our community, not the world.

   It seems that there are different ideas about community as it is
   and we wish it to become.  We are already visible to the world
   that wants to pay attention.  The ASF sets up that way.  Part of
   transparency has to do with visibility to future interested
   parties and also their recognition of how accountability is
   demonstrated here.

jan i.

>  - Dennis
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jan i []
> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2014 07:05
> To:
> Subject: time for our first "board" report.
> Hi all.
> The procedure for podling reports is pretty simple.
> - For the first 3 month we have to submit a report every month, then every
> 3 month.
> - Reports are done in the wiki
> - It is the PPMC responsibility to fill out the reports.
> - The mentors must sign off the report, for it to be accepted.
> The report follow a template, I have copied it below, look for
> "TO_BE_AGREED_ON", that is our text. I have made a proposal but hope to get
> many comments:
> --------------------CorinthiaCorinthia is a toolkit/application for
> converting between and editing commonoffice file formats, with an
> initial focus on word processing. It is designedto cater for multiple
> classes of platforms - desktop, web, and mobile - andrelies heavily on
> web technologies such as HTML, CSS, and JavaScript forrepresenting and
> manipulating documents. The toolkit is small, portable, andflexible,
> with minimal dependencies. The target audience is developers wishingto
> include office viewing, conversion, and editing functionality into
> theirapplications.Corinthia has been incubating since 2014-12-08.Three
> most important issues to address in the move towards graduation:  1.
> TO_BE_AGREED_ON, complete the move to ASF infrastructure  2.
> TO_BE_AGREED_ON, Discuss and decide on a medium term roadplan  3.
> TO_BE_AGREED_ON, Grow the communityAny issues that the Incubator PMC
> (IPMC) or ASF Board wish/need to beaware of?TO_BE_AGREED_ON none.How
> has the community developed since the last report?TO_BE_AGREED_ON We
> have spend a lot of mail on getting acquainted and finding the
> strength of each other.
> Now discussion are flowing freely. We have consensus on PPMC ==
> Committer as long as we are in incubator.How has the project developed
> since the last report?
> TO_BE_AGREED_ON, We are working hard on making a stable kernel, so we
> can more easily add more developers.
>  Date of last release: TO_BE_AGREED_ON  noneWhen were the last
> committers or PMC members elected?TO_BE_AGREED_ON 31-12-2014 added 1
> committer/PPMCSigned-off-by:   [ ](corinthia) Daniel Gruno  [
> ](corinthia) Jan IversenShepherd/Mentor notes:--------------------
> I will update the wiki once we have agreed to the text, and ask daniel
> to sign together with me.
> Looking forward to hear your comments.
> rgds
> jan I.

View raw message