Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4E66279B.4040904@shanecurcuru.org>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 10:00:59 -0400
From: Shane Curcuru <asfl@shanecurcuru.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1;
 rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums
References: 
 <CAPFNckgdTS_PFrLQyfihhxvb4++Mca13=HW3XHEANRuP+87ojw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-ksogFY70SLAwgbueS4-FUe1AuiCJRQ_fEEPf8e1mB6Qo4rQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1315311423.20412.YahooMailNeo@web161425.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <20110906133708.3a466d8710ae85364391b14c@iol.ie>
 <1315313349.87737.YahooMailNeo@web161423.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <20110906140801.79813f4b4a2a33c7e43387e5@iol.ie>
 <1315314816.91866.YahooMailNeo@web161425.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAP-ksoi2FGwfwMVDzcYEW1m-Z2cxJrQFWVc6eOS3iynzAOp1Kw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1315315953.35530.YahooMailNeo@web161423.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAP-ksohrNHChV=nH0izLDT-KYAjV9gAoBSL7AzDx54k4AjPmug@mail.gmail.com>
 <1315316458.18953.YahooMailNeo@web161424.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAP-ksoizBMSPOkOrBjLTi0N4gZYv8jMLX58aoz4XCEtEwSk1Fg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1315316912.35546.YahooMailNeo@web161425.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1315316912.35546.YahooMailNeo@web161425.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 9/6/2011 9:48 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Clearly you didn't read the whole sentence
> in context.  You certainly cannot delegate
> away someone'sPPMC voting rights on new committers,
> but that wouldn'tbe something I'd call a
> management/oversightaspect of the forums.
>
> Two different animals.

Sigh. Yeah, that's most of what I was trying to say, but I used a lot 
more words.

IP that is distributed in Apache products must come (mostly) from 
committers).  Wikis, forums, and ancillary stuff could come from 
non-committers, as long as we have reasonable license expectations.

- Shane, needing more sleep and coffee

>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Rob Weir<robweir@apache.org>
>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 9:44 AM
>> Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Joe Schaefer<joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>  wrote:
>>> Where did you get that from in what I wrote?
>>>
>>
>> Your use of the term "ALL" (in bold characters)
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Rob Weir<robweir@apache.org>
>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 9:39 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Joe Schaefer<joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>  wrote:
>>>>> It's called delegation Rob, and it's done all the
>>>>> time within the ASF.  The PPMC can delegate ALL
>>>>>
>>>>> management/oversight aspects to whomever is on
>>>>> the PPMC that is also involved with the forums.
>>>>>
>>>>> So long as 1 person on the PPMC is watching over
>>>>> the activity, and anything noteworthy gets passed
>>>>> along to the board via PPMC reports, it's a perfectly
>>>>> humane way of conducting yourselves.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So we can delegate selection of approval of committers to a single
>>>> PPMC member?  Really?
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Rob Weir<robweir@apache.org>
>>>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 9:27 AM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Joe Schaefer<joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>> 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!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And if I wanted to create a group called the "Calc developer
>>>>>> volunteers", could we join the project, with the understanding the
>>>>>> rest of the project would leave us alone?  We would vote in our own
>>>>>> committers, etc,. independently of the normal PMC process.  We would
>>>>>> conduct our business on restricted-access mailing lists, not visible
>>>>>> to the public.  But on request we'd allow PMC members to join these
>>>>>> lists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ignore for a second the IP implications.  That is really a red
>>>>>> herring.  The point is meritocracy, decision making and PMC oversight.
>>>>>> Think of similar analogies with non-release aspects of the project,
>>>>>> like web site design, documentation, wikis, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where else does Apache have a meritocracy embedded in a project that
>>>>>> does not commune with the PMC?  In an ideal world, where everything
>>>>>> just worked, and there were never any disagreements or disputes, then
>>>>>> this might work.  But in that world we wouldn't need a PMC or an ASF
>>>>>> Board either.  In any case, we don't live in such a world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is bizarre, but I hear people advocating for community
>>>>>> fragmentation in the name of community unity.  Having two parallel
>>>>>> meritocracies within the same project is fragmentation.  I don't see
>>>>>> how we can call it anything else.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>> 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>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>