www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stephen McConnell" <mcconn...@apache.org>
Subject RE: Board Commentary: Metro and Avalon
Date Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:36:28 GMT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:Ken.Coar@Golux.Com]
> Sent: 27 September 2004 15:31
> To: community@apache.org
> Cc: 'Apache Board'
> Subject: Re: Board Commentary: Metro and Avalon
> [resending, with modifications, due to screwed up cc list the first
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
> >
> > I find this discussion and the usage of terms such as "severe lack
> > respect" to be out of place and largely disproportionate with the
> > topic, substance and events.
> all right.  i disagree, however, at least with the 'out of place'
> > I received an email from the Chairman (with a specific note that
> > the message was issue by the Chairman in that capacity).
> indeed, on rechecking i see that i was working from a false premise. a
> couple of the addressees were hidden behind my mailer's twisty; yours
> was one of them.  i was mistaken about you having been omitted from
> the original message, and i withdraw those remarks and humbly
> for the statements and insinuations i made.
> > Following receipt of the "official" notification from the Board
> > concerning the Metro Project submission - I contacted Niclas as part
> > our normal process of coordination.  I expressed some opinions and
> > concerns to Niclas on the subject of the notification - including
> > subject of the reservations and the strongly implied implications or
> > those reservations.  A particular concern that I raised was the
> > of any supporting justification or explanation for the "reservation"
> > that was for all intensive purposes an explicit and directed
> > of my participation in the oversight of a project to which I am
> > committed, engaged and actively contributing.
> i don't intend to get into the 'bring me a rock' scenario concerning
> who said what when to justify whichever.  all the information is
> available in the archives.  i imagine either sam or brian will post
> relevant pointers.  if they don't, perhaps i will.  notwithstanding,
> there *are* documented incidents leading to the reservation.

Thanks - this addresses the center of my concern and I would like you
know that I appreciate any actions from yourself, sam, or brian on this

> > What is in question is the openness of the Apache Software
> > and that question is of interest to every committer at Apache.
> >
> > It is my opinion the Niclas posted his initial comments to the list
> > simply as a "heads-up" to each and every committer here that
> > happened recently that simply was not right.
> that opinion may or may not reflect actual fact.  let us assume for
> moment that it does.  'was not right' is also a matter of opinion.
> is not a matter of opinion, but is rather a matter of fact, is that
> quoted a private message in a public forum without consulting the
> attempting to raise awareness by defining a hypothetical case, or even
> actual case with the specifics removed, would have been much more
> acceptable,
> although there is a slippery slope.  quoting a private message without
> permission isn't acceptable at all.
> > Will the actions taken by Niclas in defending the principals of
> > and community within the ASF simply lead to another statement of
> > "serious reservation" concerning his role and potential
> possibly, in terms of roles involving representation or social
> responsibility.
> this sequence *should* have no effect on opinions concerning his
> ability and contributions.  people are people, however.
> i am dismayed that the private message was exposed the way it was.  i
> much more concerned that the individual involved apparently doesn't
> the action as incorrect.  if i felt comfortable that it *did*
> why it was inappropriate, i personally would be glad to regard the
> incident as a one-time mistake arising from misunderstanding or
> differences, and most of my concern would evaporate.
> >> i do not intend to 'fuel the flames,' but neither do i intend to
> >> anyone get away unchallenged with assertions or implications about
> >> organization that are patently untrue.
> >
> > Please consider this message as my direct and immediate challenge.
> to what, specifically?  to my admitted-above patently-untrue assertion
> that
> you weren't on the initial distribution?  


> done.  


> something else?

Yep - just wanted to say thank you and that you reply was very much
appreciated in terms of both substance and style.


> - --
> #ken	P-|}

To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org

View raw message