incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Louis Suárez-Potts <lsuarezpo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: admin permissions on old OOo
Date Mon, 30 Jan 2012 23:29:20 GMT
FWIW,
OOo had a policy like ASF's, but I and others honoured exceptions, and
they were exceptions. They were infrequent, and we made it clear that
expunging from the OOo lists was not likely to be a panacea, that once
Pandora's uhm, can, had been opened, the worms were free to wriggle
where they willed.

Louis



On 30 January 2012 18:19, TJ Frazier <tjfrazier@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> Ross,
> I am not taking this personally, but I /am/ replying personally, below.
>
>
> On 1/30/2012 15:57, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>
>> On 30 January 2012 19:45, TJ Frazier<tjfrazier@cfl.rr.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1/30/2012 14:22, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>>> What specific things are being asked of you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To remove a specific email message posted to a public list
>>>> (documentation) by mistake.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If the message is on one of the two documentation ML's (author or dev
>>> @doc.oo.o) I can remove it, or at least the SYMPA page says I can.
>>> You or the user can mail me at tjfrazier@openoffice.org, or bring the
>>> matter
>>> to this list (ooo-dev). I need sender and date.
>>
>>
>> The ASF has a policy of *not* removing mails in the majority of cases.
>> It simply is not possible to do so since our mailing lists are
>> archived all over the place. See
>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/public-archives.html
>>
> Most organizations, like most individuals, have a few suboptimal policies
> (calling them "damn-fool" would be rude, so I won't). The ASF is no
> exception, and this policy is one of them.
>
> AFAICS, the rationales for the policy are:
>
> (1) "Can't do it perfectly." True, but this is the age-old conflict between
> "the good vs. the best", or "improvement vs. perfection". I assert that
> there is no overarching answer to these, hence the decisions must be made at
> a lower level. In this general case, I lean strongly toward "improvement".
> It is the friendly thing to do, and we build community one friend at a time.
> (2) "Publisher of record." Let's not get too full of ourselves, here. If a
> post makes a point in a discussion and prompts replies, or otherwise meets
> some criterion of "general importance", I would argue to keep it. If not,
> and if the user wants it gone, it's toast.
> (3) "Too much work." (a) Frequency: I have moderated two (admittedly not
> very active) lists for about 6 months. This is the first such request I have
> received. YMMV. (b) Level of effort: This user provided a direct link to the
> archived message. It took me one click to get there, maybe 10 seconds to
> confirm that this was the information in question, one click to delete it,
> and a third click to close the browser. This might be harder under ezmlm,
> but that's something for ezmlm moderators to take up with Infra.
> (4) "The user should have known better." True, but don't be snide.
>
> Interestingly enough, despite my rant, my action (I have deleted the post)
> seems to fall within policy!
>
>  /tj/
>
>
>> ...
>>
>>>>> Why aren't they being brought to the list (either details, or at least
>>>>> an
>>>>> overview of what this work is about)?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Because the person wanting the removal, I presume, did not know about
>>>> the new changes. I have no problem explaining things--have--but I'm
>>>> simply laying out the facts.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>> The point is that you are not a contact point for the AOO project,
>> this list is. If you, as a single individual, choose to act on
>> requests like these and others that you frequently claim are coming
>> your way you will quickly run out of time or you will fail to address
>> the requests. Please share everything here (or on the private lists if
>> absolutely necessary).
>>
>> Personally I would rather see you spending time addressing the issue
>> with SPI funds since you are the named individual dealing with the SPI
>> (or alternatively indicating that you do not intend to do so, thereby
>> making way for someone else to do it).
>>
>> Ross
>>
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message