incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject RE: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums
Date Tue, 06 Sep 2011 16:02:23 GMT
Joe, I think, as Shane mentions, that there are two problems.

The first is that we no longer have any resource stepping-forward, so far, to complete the
migration of the forum operation onto Apache infrastructure.  So it may become irrelevant
what governance accommodation is possible.

The second is that the Forum operators may be losing faith in Apache.  Yesterday, it seemed
that they were eager to adjust their way of operating to accommodate the basic requirements,
especially the relaxed case that you have described as sufficient for going ahead. 

 Also, much to my surprise when I was allowed in as a "Volunteer" so I could observe and participate
on those forums (but not break anything), I discovered that there are a number of Apache OOo
PPMC Committers, including Terry Ellison, already serving in various senior capacities in
that group.  I learned last night that the same is true for the Japanese Language forums.
 I find that aspect of this situation quite baffling.

I am disappointed by one situation observed in the past few hours.  A vote to switch the site
governance sub-forum to public (perhaps read-only) is failing at the moment. One comment by
a recent "no" voter was not against the ballot proposition itself but against the perceived
treatment by Apache.

Another vote, "Do you broadly support permitting Apache members read access to our work and
discussions" involving creation of a special oversight role  was passing overwhelmingly (not
one single "no" so far).  That had been initiated by Terry Ellison on Monday.  Balloting ends
on Thursday.

In all other threads that I could read, there was more excitement and action toward finding
an accommodation with Apache requirements.  I am hopeful that can be sustained.  I will continue
to watch as long as I am welcome there.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Schaefer [mailto:joe_schaefer@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 06:14
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums

Up until a few days ago I thought we had one.
Move the forums over to the ASF, give the PPMC
and ASF members the full ability (upon request)
to oversee allcommunications within the forums,
and life goeson.  I see no need for the Volunteers
to join the PPMC or anything like that, just keep
doing whatever you're doing and keep the PPMC abreast
of anything report-worthy when they need to report
to the board.  If the Volunteers want to incorporate
some Apache-style voting processes into their ops,
go for it!




>________________________________
>From: Rory O'Farrell <ofarrwrk@iol.ie>
>To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 9:08 AM
>Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums
>
>On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 05:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
>Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
><snip>
>> So to answer your questions, yes it certainly could be done
>> within the Apache structure.  No it probably cannot be done
>> to host stuff here on behalf of some third party.
>
>Thanks, that is helpful in clarifying options.
>
>So to be hosted on Apache one would need to find some mechanism whereby a forum would
fit into Apache; by your earlier post you do not think there is such a mechanism. Might Apache
be prepared to modify (by extension) their structures to accomodate these?  This becomes a
problem for the legal draughtsmen, of course.  The old rule of £minimal change" ought apply.

>
>I'm not asking for a change, just exploring the possibility of one.
>
>-- 
>Rory O'Farrell <ofarrwrk@iol.ie>
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message