Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 37A1D7C76 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2011 16:48:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 7367 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2011 16:48:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 7111 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2011 16:48:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 7090 invoked by uid 99); 4 Sep 2011 16:48:04 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:48:04 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of grobmeier@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.210.175] (HELO mail-iy0-f175.google.com) (209.85.210.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:47:57 +0000 Received: by iagz35 with SMTP id z35so5421789iag.6 for ; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 09:47:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MNoPlVa8X9dLGajCEIU5FNSXPJ2PTRSYo3LRw9vR/6M=; b=QPSpvS2Xj9MjzSEBnHaOMypuIP6fBDwydq31PhJFfhns8+asV1BnfmvgBAxuYpq1L6 ztg91P26g9BfsG3+ungOrKKhEsIJp04lw3gIm9ENj8tDHW0vLWiS6qZhp3z2Zk6fBeFN MTdhx+c/XFD75A0gw1QtMY7SZIc1NJZCFsy/c= Received: by 10.42.196.3 with SMTP id ee3mr2686354icb.168.1315154856177; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 09:47:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.176.71 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Sep 2011 09:47:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4E5FB6F0.2060504@ellisons.org.uk> <4E5FC756.5010106@ellisons.org.uk> <4E5FD55C.40207@ellisons.org.uk> <4E5FE090.2020506@apache.org> <014801cc68e5$d5fd5290$81f7f7b0$@acm.org> <1314911707.1938.55.camel@sybil> <4E60193C.4090304@shanecurcuru.org> <4E606C19.40005@ellisons.org.uk> From: Christian Grobmeier Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 18:47:16 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: An invitation to committers to the OOo Community Forums To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org >> It might be different to discuss roughly at the dev forums were most >> people know each other than in a public message boards were even my >> grandmother might participate. At this project I heard the term "end >> users" very often; I don't think you can use the same rules of heavy >> geek-discussion for end users of OpenOffice. >> > > I agree. =C2=A0But I think that just means that support forum > admins/moderators bring such discussions over here, to the project > mailing lists. =C2=A0Honestly, if a forum volunteer is not already on thi= s > list, understanding what we are doing and how Apache project works and > how the code base is developing, etc., then they will have a very > difficult time fairly representing the project to the users. =C2=A0I don'= t > think the project benefits if support volunteers are detached from the > primary project discussion list. +1 > And we all are at a disadvantage if > the support volunteers are not contributing to this list. =C2=A0The same > arguments against fragmenting the project into dozens of mailing > lists, also apply here. =C2=A0Just as we would not create a separate > ooo-support-operations-discuss mailing list, we should not encourage > the same from happening via a forum. =C2=A0The fact that support operatio= ns > are also discussed in private only makes this fragmentation more > problematic. > > This is really easy to resolve: > > 1) Discussions on evolving forum policies and rules must occur on > ooo-dev. =C2=A0These are tantamount to proposals, and they are subject to > Apache Way decision making, just like any other part of the project. > If I wanted to suggest a different editing policy for the community > wiki, or a new moderation policy for ooo-users, I would be slapped > down if I raised it on ooo-private. =C2=A0The transparency principle > applies equally to the forums. > > 2) Non-confidential, day-to-day operations of the forum should occur > in a publicly-readable forum, or on a new public mailing list. I'd let > the forum volunteers decide which. > > 3) Private discussions on confidential matters, including your > grandmother, occur either on ooo-private or on a private forum that > echos its posts to ooo-private. =C2=A0Again, I'd let the forum volunteers > decide which. +1 Sounds like a plan. And by the way, my grandmother is a nice person actuall= y ;-) Cheers > -Rob > --=20 http://www.grobmeier.de