incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shane Curcuru <>
Subject Re: Migrating the web forums at to Apache servers
Date Mon, 08 Aug 2011 15:10:48 GMT
A general comment on mailing list policy at Apache:

On 8/6/2011 4:30 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:08 AM, Terry Ellison<>  wrote:
>> On 05/08/11 08:10, eric b wrote:
>>> Le 5 août 11 à 03:12, Pedro Giffuni a écrit :


>> Historically and (possibly with some tweaks) going forward, the people who
>> make the policy decision on the forums are the people who contribute to
>> them. In a 100% community run effort, IFAIK, this is the only formula that
>> will work.

Indeed!  This is meritocracy, part of the Apache Way where the 
contributors on some part of a project get recognized for their actual 
contributions to the project over time, and are elected as committers 
(or PPMC members, or are granted moderating rights in a wiki/forum).

There is obviously a lot of work ahead in terms of migrating this 
existing community to Apache infrastructure and policies.


> In most Apache projects the user support is done on a user mailing
> list.  That is how most projects undertake their responsibilities to
> engage with their users.   I think we've agreed that because of the
> traffic and number of users we have, that a user forum is the better
> mechanism for doing support.  But I think that this support is still a
> project responsibility.  That is why we are discussing on a project
> mailing list how we will use Apache hardware to host these forum.

Another saying of the Apache Way is: "if it didn't happen on the list, 
it didn't happen".  My feeling is that decisions about the project 
(code, doc, strategy, whatever) will need to continue to be made on 
mailing lists like ooo-dev@, in the Apache tradition.

Given OOo's large number of end-users, I agree with keeping the forums 
for actual user support running.  I.e. for end-users who can't or 
otherwise wouldn't ask on list, we should definitely keep the forums to 
be able to provide answers to their end user questions.

A key community issue for moderators/committers will be how to get any 
information back to the core project team, here on the lists.  I.e. if a 
whole bunch of users have issues with the newest language pack for 
Apache OOo Foo module, the forum moderators will need to take those 
comments back to the ooo-dev@ or appropriate list - or help open JIRAs - 
so the project can address the issues.


>> Policy issues are discussed here and it is the consensus here that sets
>> policy.  So for example we had a long debate on whether to support
>> LibreOffice when the Oracle view seemed to us to be hostile to this.  Our
>> strong consensus was that in reality there is one OOo community, and so it
>> made sense to do so.
> I am concerned with any private list that is not managed by the PPMC,
> like ooo-private or ooo-secruity.  This is especially true while we
> are a podling.  Mentors and IPMC members should be able to monitor our
> progress as a podling.  Having 10+ private discussion groups hinders
> that.
> Is there any reason why sensitive matters cannot just be discussed in
> ooo-private?  Or alternatively, for security vulnerability-related
> issues, in ooo-security (which is also private)?

Indeed, any private mailing lists need to be hosted on apache 
infrastructure and need to allow oversight by PPMC members and ASF 
Members[1].  A key Apache policy is that all mailing lists across the 
ASF allow ASF Members to read or subscribe.  The *only* exceptions are 
ones dealing with root@ or private board personnel/legal matters.

If the forum admins will be making policy decisions, either on product 
matters or how the forums are run, the PPMC needs to be involved and 
approving them.

- Shane


View raw message