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 6B4247A10 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2011 18:05:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 64240 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2011 18:05:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 64048 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2011 18:05:33 -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 64038 invoked by uid 99); 4 Sep 2011 18:05:32 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 18:05:32 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-ew0-f47.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username robweir, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 18:05:32 +0000 Received: by ewy5 with SMTP id 5so1986845ewy.6 for ; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:05:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.2.148 with SMTP id 20mr925431eef.125.1315159530782; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:05:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.188.15 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Sep 2011 11:05:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1315157787.63820.YahooMailNeo@web161423.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <4E6361AE.3070907@ellisons.org.uk> <4E638B48.9020200@ellisons.org.uk> <1315157787.63820.YahooMailNeo@web161423.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 14:05:30 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Dissatisfaction amongst the community admins, moderators and volunteers From: Rob Weir To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote= : > Being a member-based organization the ASF requires > that all foundation activities be subject to member > scrutiny (with only a handful of operational exceptions). > > I would be perfectly satisfied if the private forums > are fully archived and made available to any ASF member on > request, without undue delay. > And to all PPMC members as well. -Rob > > > >>________________________________ >>From: Simon Phipps >>To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org >>Sent: Sunday, September 4, 2011 11:14 AM >>Subject: Re: Dissatisfaction amongst the community admins, moderators and= volunteers >> >>On Sep 4, 2011 3:45 PM, "Rob Weir" wrote: >> >>> I don't think discussions about how the project is run is something >>> that we should be doing in private.=C2=A0 Discussing such matters, even= if >>> strong opinions are raised, is the essence of transparency.=C2=A0 Remem= ber, >>> controversial is not the same as confidential.=C2=A0 In Apache projects= we >>> discuss non-confidential matters openly. >> >>... unless they are on the PPMC private list, when that royal "we" no lon= ger >>includes everyone here. I believe Terry and others are saying that the >>(independent) forum community has a similar approach, with a private foru= m >>for sensitive matters. I also believe that in the interests of that very >>transparency you and others are invited to participate in that place as a >>transitional activity. >> >>What exactly is the problem here? >> >>S. >> >> >>