Hi Michael,
I prefer to avoid going into details as people should draw their
conclusions by looking at timing and people involved by looking at the
ESC meeting minutes and your proposal.
On 08/06/2022 10:40, Michael Meeks wrote:
Hi Paolo,
On 08/06/2022 09:18, Paolo Vecchi wrote:
That is a copy/paste from a text the general manager of a commercial
contributor sent the 23/05
It is not the greatest vote of confidence in your position that
you critique the source of a counter-proposal rather than the proposal
itself: please play the ball not the man.
Actions have been performed by people, in this case you and Kendy.
As I've been told off for stating facts and not naming people so I guess
I have to make it clear who did what and when.
A sequence of events/coincidences show that some proposals are more
equal than others and clear objections that make your proposal more
complicated, expensive and much less effective have not been addressed
at all.
You then go on to (again) mis-characterize Kendy's merged
proposal, something you've repeatedly done and been corrected on:
developers mostly focused on mentoring are very difficult to find
and very expensive, and anyone with basic HR skills would never let
employees be managed by a committee in which third party companies
have can have so much influence as seen in recent minutes.
The proposal contains this:
"The Executive Director shall direct day to day management for
the Targeted Developers to ensure they effectively focus on the
Target Areas."
Line management is up to the ED - that is explicit. I suspect that
they will not direct management by a committee - but it's up to them =)
Our ED has already plenty of things to do and micromanaging in-house
developers should not be part of his job.
Please re-read the rest of my proposal as it states how things should be
run to avoid overwhelming our ED. Our ED will evaluate things only if
there are issues between the team and the ESC.
Attempting to exclude targetted developers from attending the ESC
call and reporting on what they're up to - as they become respected
peers alongside others working on the code seems extraordinary.
Nowhere in my proposal is being said that the ESC will be excluded.
Please re-read my proposal.
Again your understanding of how LibreOffice development and the
ESC works seems weak as I've outlined before[1].
I'm slowly learning about it thanks to the good comments from Adreas
that pushed me to look into it even if development is not my main focus
and it is only one of the various areas LibreOffice is made of.
I've seen a very nice way to cooperate between developers in a way that
seems to take in consideration the best way to deal with code and find
good solutions to issues
Your intervention in the ESC meeting the 26/05/2022 and the 02/06/2022
had absolutely nothing to do with code and a lot to do with politics and
undue influence in a committee that now cannot be seen as a neutral ground.
Regards,
Michael.
Ciao
Paolo
[1] -
https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/2022/msg00557.html
--
Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
