Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 944A38254 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 28667 invoked by uid 500); 12 Aug 2011 15:59:59 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 28541 invoked by uid 500); 12 Aug 2011 15:59:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 28533 invoked by uid 99); 12 Aug 2011 15:59:58 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:59:58 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-iy0-f169.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username noirin, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:59:57 +0000 Received: by iym1 with SMTP id 1so1884151iym.0 for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:59:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.96.195 with SMTP id i3mr2251895ibn.9.1313164797280; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:59:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.183.147 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:59:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <7DE220F2-5AFE-4A01-AEEC-58CF1CA9F379@webmink.com> <003501cc5886$55214f10$ff63ed30$@acm.org> <4E452798.8060503@apache.org> <006201cc5905$48a34570$d9e9d050$@acm.org> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?N=F3ir=EDn_Plunkett?= Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:59:37 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Making mailing lists useful (was Re: [Proposal]) To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Rob Weir wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton > wrote: >> -1 >> >> Hey, a terrific blow for community there, Rob! >> >> Please don't ever do that again for a matter under active discussion. = =A0Not ever. >> >> I urge you to revert those changes. >> > > I disagree. =A0 Bikeshedding on the list is not an impediment to action. > =A0I implemented one of the proposals discussed on the list. It is in > SVN. =A0If someone feels strongly, they can revert. =A0But note that in > CTR, -1's are invalid unless accompanied by technical objections, a > statement of an alternative proposal and a willingness to implement > the alternative. > Reverting should really be a last resort. I had a technical objection, a statement of an alternative proposal, and a willingness to implement the alternative. Granted, I didn't actually say "-1", but I still think it's pretty poor show. Consensus is not "who commits first, wins", and meaningful discussion that's still ongoing less than 48hrs after you made your proposal hardly constitutes "bikeshedding". I'm going out now, but I hope we can see a little more collaboration and a little less bulldozing in the future. Noirin