Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rgardler@opendirective.com
 designates 209.85.212.169 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJO+UbuUokbvbEpiY+yd7no23DnnPMVEyZ_faPhDm3yB=kAEmw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAOFYJNb7NsegxPoWCvp8p2SnmAPrw15jk0aNxmmgt7rhNq+9RA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F866B7D.7050301@rowe-clan.net>
 <AD1F4C16-EBE4-487F-B2EF-2A7E44F32DDE@comcast.net>
 <CAKQbXgDn5dqK=t2oNoF2YCCG8ZpzBaYiZBE+K-mW4rxygqOtRg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJO+UbuUokbvbEpiY+yd7no23DnnPMVEyZ_faPhDm3yB=kAEmw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:27:11 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAKQbXgBQbrJYBdf6UM9QfXf4dCZuUj21L5mjNMATgzt5+DPKWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Extraordinary OpenOffice security patch (Was: [Incubator Wiki]
 Update of "April2012" by robweir)
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 12 April 2012 08:59, ant elder <ant.elder@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Ross Gardler
> <rgardler@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> On 12 April 2012 07:48, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> Sorry, I can't remain mute, but I offended anyone, sorry, but this was wrongly done. I don't know a better way....
>>
>> As one of the "inner circle" I am not offended. All your points are
>> valid. Thank you for sharing them.
>>
>> This was the first and, in all likelihood the last time such an
>> unusual circumstance will arise. There is no right or wrong way of
>> handling these things.
>>
>> Had we included x then y would have felt excluded, this is what we are
>> seeing here. However, the line must be drawn somewhere.
>>
>
> Surely at the ASF the line is at PMC membership. If only a subset of
> the PPMC is trusted enough to be part of some inner circle then the
> PPMC should be disbanded and reformed from just that inner circle.

This is a podling with a very unusual history. it is not as simple as
that. However, your general observation is a valid one. The time for
addressing this is during incubation when it becomes possible to
determine who is contributing positively to the running of the PPMC.


> Equally for the Incubator PMC, if Noel or who ever was chair should
> have been told then the Incubator PMC should have been included.

Yes, I've already acknowledged that in retrospect this should have
been the case.

Ross

-- 
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com

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