incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Shahaf <...@daniel.shahaf.name>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Review of OpenOffice.org Forums Agreement
Date Tue, 11 Oct 2011 23:10:46 GMT
drew wrote on Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 18:07:35 -0400:
> On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 23:58 +0200, floris v wrote:
> > Op 11-10-2011 23:46, Dennis E. Hamilton schreef:
> > >> *H.* Should the ASF or the Apache OpenOffice.org project decide to
> > >> terminate its support of the forums, it will grant a period of at
> > >> least 90 days for the transfer of the contents and structure of the
> > >> forums to another host as decided by the Administrators, Moderators
> > >> and Volunteers.
> > > The PPMC is not empowered to agree to a clause that reads, "The ASF will
> > > grant 90 days to someone".  Only the board and officers can make
> > > commitments on behalf of the org.
> > >
> > > That's just the legal side of things and is not the same as the question
> > > of whether one should expect the ASF, should any of its entities decide
> > > to take the forums down, provide advance warning or migration codepath.
> > >
> > > The relevant entities in this case include IPMC, Infra, and Board.
> > How exactly should I understand this? Is this meant to be discouraging, 
> > like: forum people, you might as well leave right now?
> > 

No.

I don't know how to communicate my point more clearly than I did in the
first sentences of my previous email.

Beyond that, +1 all over Drew's reply --- including the points about
framework / organizational structure (goes to the PPMC's inability to
make commitments on behalf of the Foundation), about a broader group
(I'm not on the PPMC), and about not jumping to conclusions.

> 
> Hi Floris,
> 
> Just my thought on that - if you recall I mentioned that it was time to
> let the Apache folks see the proposal and make sure it fits into the
> framework here also - it is a two way street..if I understand what is
> being said it is merely that this is something not seen before and will
> naturally, IMO, get a review from a broader group then just the PPMC.
> 
> and now I see that Ross G. has stated pretty much exactly that.
> 
> So, just my .02 worth - it doesn't appear to be anything beyond what one
> should expect at this point and I would strongly advise not to jump to
> any conclusions.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> //drew
> 

Mime
View raw message