openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: Dissatisfaction amongst the community admins, moderators and volunteers
Date Mon, 05 Sep 2011 13:33:14 GMT
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Daniel Shahaf <> wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote on Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 13:01:50 -0400:
>> I think it would be good if they made up their mind soon.  I thought
>> we were close to the physical migration being completed.  If the
>> current volunteers are not on board with the Apache project, then
>> we'll need to explore alternative approaches, such as:
>> 1) Point users to
>> 2) Do support via mailing list only
>> 3) Use forums, but find new volunteers
> 4) Abort the migration, tell the forums guys to find some non-ASF
> hosting where they can continue running the forums unchanged

And that would be fine as well.  I think the general error in the way
we've handled this is we've ignored these issues for too long, plowing
through on the technical migration, while ignoring the policy issues,
or even the fundamental question of whether the forums volunteers want
to work with Apache.

Note of the issues I've raised are new.  I've raised them all before,
months ago.

For example, I raised many of the project integration with the forum
admins back in June [1].  I raised the specific issue of the private
forums over a month ago [2], as well as branding [3].  One Apache
Member seemed to confirm that this was a problem at the time [3].   I
also received an off-line note from another thanking me for raising
these issues.

So none of this is really new.  These issues have been known, but
sadly ignored, for months.  Whenever these issues were raised, the
response has always been, "We'll deal with these issues later" or "I'm
only concerned with the migration of the servers".  Well, later is

Although some have portrayed my -1 as coming out of nowhere, this
opposition should not be a surprise to anyone who has been paying
attention.  If legitimate issues are raised and then ignored, then
that is what you will get if you try to just plow ahead.

If we had to do this all over again, I think the better approach would
have been:

1) Don't start with the server migration for the forums.  Don't be so

2) Invite the existing forum volunteers to make a proposal on ooo-dev,
for what they would like to do with the forums, if anything

3) The proposal should have been discussed and either lazy consensus
sought or if necessary a vote taken.  Most likely the proposal would
have required changes to conform with Apache expectations.

4) Only after there is an acceptable proposal start the migration

The fundamental error we've made is to start the migration before
addressing objections related to process.

In fact we should probably pause on further migration until we resolve
these issues.   I don't support the view that we'll defer this until
graduation.  We might defer implementation until some later date,
certainly.  But I need to see a proposal from the forum volunteers on
what they want to do.  This needs to come from them, and be backed by
their consensus.  If they are willing to fully integrate into the
Apache project, then that has my 100% support, even if implementing
this integration takes more time.  But if they do not have that
consensus then I would not support the physical integration of the
forums in the uncertain hope that at some future date they *might*
wish to integrate into the project.  The time to decide this question
is now.  And it is their choice.   The ball is in their court.


View raw message