www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <Ross.Gard...@microsoft.com>
Subject RE: on consensus, and serenity
Date Tue, 11 Aug 2015 21:44:42 GMT
I have come to the conclusion that Larry is not interested in simply "being heard". We have
a consensus and according to the Apache Way that's enough to demonstrate he has been heard.
Unfortunately, for Larry this is not enough.

I do not support a vote by the membership, they vote for a board so they don't have to handle
this stuff. We should not be asking the membership to do work they already did. There are
mechanisms Larry can use to express his displeasure with the board, up to and including calling
for the membership to replace them (should he feel that there are *considerably* more folks
who support his position than have spoken here). It's up to Larry to do the work if he wants
to make such a noise.

I also don't support asking the board to explicitly endorse the current VP Legal. If the board
had a concern about VP Legal they would deal with it. We should not look to the board to explicitly
reaffirm its trust in an officer every time a single (I stress *single*) member is dissatisfied
while many (I stress *many*) have expressed their support.

For my part any mail from Larry to this list is now dumped straight into my trash. All other
mails from Larry get through and if someone takes the time to reply to Larry on this list
I will see that reply (so I will be able to detect any kind of change in the consensus balance).

Ross




Sent from Mail<http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10





From: Tim Williams
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 12:53 PM
To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Subject: on consensus, and serenity


I'm curious how we can work ourselves out of this nagging cycle of
Larry encouraging us to be more liberal in our licenses because we
legally can and us responding with we don't want to even if we could
legally get away with it?

By my count, four out of the previous four months have seen this same
cycle in only slightly different forms.  I'm confident a quick mail
search would find at least as many months out of the previous four
years.  And, these tend to be long (>50) threads.

I support challenging the status quo, questioning policies, etc. In
fact, I believe it makes us stronger and a good rigorous debate on
core values helps newcomers to understand the Apache Way and our
culture in a deeper way.  It's healthy community behavior and
old-timers mostly don't mind helping folks understand the "why" behind
a given policy.

However, it's not healthy to keep asking the same question, over and
over, even while receiving the same answer each time.  It's neither
fun nor fruitful. Were it a technical issue, we could reason through
it and move on much more easily.

So, I wonder how we might re-assure Larry that his voice has been
heard but also allow us not to keep reading the same argument over and
over?  I've thought perhaps a referendum membership vote (with steve)
might help? or maybe an explicit vote by the board [vs implicit by
keeping Jim around:)] or, ?

Thanks,
--tim

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



Mime
View raw message