Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Subject: Re: [OT] How to prevent abusing Apache priviliges
From: Rolf Kulemann <roku@apache.org>
To: General Incubator List <general@incubator.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <90F2E08A-1F1E-11D9-B3CA-000393753936@gbiv.com>
References: <1097799093.2679.22.camel@guadalinex>
	 <CF4BA826-1EE5-11D9-A656-000A958B684A@outerthought.org>
	 <41703AD6.8090908@apache.org>
	 <90F2E08A-1F1E-11D9-B3CA-000393753936@gbiv.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <1097944002.2180.47.camel@gideon.rkunet.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:26:42 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sat, 2004-10-16 at 04:53, Roy T.Fielding wrote:
> > A few weeks ago, many people encouraged Niclas Hedhman not to bring 
> > private matters into the public here.  Now, some people want this 
> > issue brought into public, whereas others say it should be handled 
> > only with the Incubator PMC, or possibly the Board.
> 
> The general at incubator mailing list is a public list.  Anyone 
> interested
> in participating in the incubation of new projects should join it.  That
> is where such topics are discussed. 

Here are my two cents.

1.) The root mail of this thread talked about private mails as a source
of the concern. Those private mails should never be posted/forwarded or
used to make the happening clear, if there was a happening at all.
Forwarding those mails would violate privacy and "nettikette"
(spelling?).

2.) The root mail was kept quite abstract. I can see that a lot of
people are interested in this topic and we should try to keep the
abstract level here.

3.) I'm an Apache community newbie but I learned the following: In the
ASF a lot is about community and community processes, which is the main
strength of the ASF compared to other, lets say, OS organisations. Good
organisational/community processes support efficiency and lower chaos,
imho.

4.) If the usecase of this thread's topic is ever happening, there
should be an ASF _process_ to take care of that. The requirement to such
a process is quite high, since it is important not to damage projects
and persons reputation; mentors or ppmc members have done a lot for the
ASF(?) and a _small_ mistake should not have big impact, but of course
consequences! 

5.) I have no idea how such a process could look like. The problem I
have is, that the cause , in this usecase, was/were private mails. All
ASF processes are based on community/public mailings etc. Maybe the
source of those mails should get a private reply, too, in order to give
a chance to correct the error i.e. to step back from what ever position
in the target community or so. If the concern can not be clarified that
way, it should be discussed more public maybe on ppmc or pmc level.

6.) The interesting thing for me is; what motivation could such private
mailings have. IMHO it is private interest which somehow contradict with
the target communitie's/project's interests. 

How can that be? I guess because of commercial, business strategic
and/or marketing interest.


REMINDER: We should keep this discussion on an abstract level.

-- 
Rolf Kulemann


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org