Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of dave2wave@comcast.net
 designates 76.96.27.211 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: Proposal: Forum integration
From: Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP-ksohh8FPZXhrJuj1TfY+7nAmpPW6kt8KdiLYNDD5FK_Cz7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 11:56:54 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <05895C59-2268-47C9-990A-C495476C6F39@comcast.net>
References: 
 <CAPFNckhG=pCrw6vxjeRFT04_daJp+j6gQTtLfiU3fqKNa52cZg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1315332955.1994.81.camel@sybil> <1315333192.1994.82.camel@sybil>
 <CAP-ksojzNtc3opqrCFujDLj8u3rMysYr3-aaQWOPx+O-K+A7og@mail.gmail.com>
 <175E6A2F-FFA5-4AF0-9968-8FD7A5FD94B9@comcast.net>
 <CAP-ksohh8FPZXhrJuj1TfY+7nAmpPW6kt8KdiLYNDD5FK_Cz7g@mail.gmail.com>
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org


On Sep 6, 2011, at 11:51 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> =
wrote:
>>=20
>> On Sep 6, 2011, at 11:28 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>=20
>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:19 PM, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 14:15 -0400, drew wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 19:23 +0200, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> we have spoken much - now its time to outline what needs to be =
done. I
>>>>>> have started a Wiki page with that:
>>>>>> =
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOODEV/Changes+integrate+the+f=
orums+into+the+AOOo+project
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> Lets bring the talk into shapes.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Thanks for that Christian.
>>>>=20
>>>> sorry - a double post.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> My only real question is regarding the moderators needing to be =
part of
>>>>> the PMC - I'm not at all sure I see that need.
>>>>=20
>>>> just to be clear - although I would encourage mod's to be in the =
PMC my
>>>> question is about making it a hard requirement.
>>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> I'd think of it this way:
>>>=20
>>> We don't want a stranger to walk off the street and be immediately a
>>> moderator, right?  It requires some level of vetting.  A moderator =
can
>>> ban users, they can kick real people off the boards if they do not
>>> like their behavior. So it is a position of authority.  A Moderator =
is
>>> an important role with real influence.  They, through their =
decisions,
>>> help set the tone of the forum and represent the "public face" of
>>> Apache OpenOffice.
>>>=20
>>> How do we ensure, as a project, that the right people are given that
>>> responsibility?  In other words, in what way does the PPMC oversee
>>> this?  One way would be to use the committer proposal/approval
>>> process.  Something less formal, is what we do with mailing list
>>> moderators.  We propose a name to ooo-dev, in public, seek lazy
>>> consensus, and then ask Apache Infra to add their names.  They don't
>>> need to be a committer, but they require nomination and lazy =
consensus
>>> approval.
>>=20
>> The main change you are proposing is where the nomination occurs. =
According to numerous descriptions of how the forums are administrated =
even "Volunteers" are known and selected before they get that status. I =
think this is probably reasonable.
>>=20
>=20
> Maybe you can restate that in another way.  It doesn't parse for me.
> Anyone in any approval process needs to be known before they are
> selected, right?  This is not a novel concept.  The question really is
> who approves moderators?  Given that the role carries more
> responsibility than other roles, like mailing list moderator, where we
> already require lazy consensus on ooo-dev, what do we require of
> moderators?
>=20
> In other words, we need to connect the dots.  The PPMC oversees the
> project, chaired by an Apache VP, responsible to the ASF Board.  The
> Moderators represent the public face of the project, with powers over
> users who participate on the Apache-branded and hosted support forum.
> How do we connect the dots?  There may be more than one way of doing
> this, but I hope we agree that the dots need to be connected somehow.
>=20
> If anyone can explain better "Volunteers", that would be great.  Do
> they have any extra rights?  Or is it just the case that some of what
> Apache would call "contributors" are given the title "Volunteer" while
> other, perhaps less active contributors are not given that title?
>=20
>> A second change is adding to Infrastructure the burden of maintaining =
the moderator list. I'm not so sure that this is necessary.
>>=20
>=20
> I don't think I said that anywhere.

"and then ask Apache Infra to add their names."

Regards,
Dave

>=20
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>=20
>>>=20
>>> -Rob
>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>> I'm wondering if there is a particular action or actions that you =
feel
>>>>> triggers this as a requirement?
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> //drew
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>=20
>>=20