Saransh, I agree with your submissions. We don't need to follow any person , but the project itself. I also like your idea of rethinking the architecture to take advantage of Web3. There has to be a willingness from all of us to embrace change of course without jeopardizing the core open source principles of the project .
Thank you all for the discussion . I call this progress Bruce Tushabe In rural Uganda On Wed, Sep 22, 2021, 5:33 AM Saransh Sharma <[email protected]> wrote: > Myrle , > > I am not demanding anything from anyone let me put this straight , I think > I have agreed to whatever has happened and am trying to improvise on the > project. > > This is my intention , that how the whole project is structured , and to > me it gives the impression that the representation of the community by and > large is handed by just few. I would like that to happen not on merit. I > would like to get out of these titles , this is more about the project > movement. > > I might not want a new project , I have been contributing to the existing > project now if you want me to prove in your bounded closed reality that's > quite not fair ,i am not up for such low level integrity checks, (You have > to be like us , then you are the PMC, or steering committee e) Actually > the new project should not need to be a fork of Apache Fineract . If you > change the architecture of the project then its no longer same. > > > Again, you are making it about an individual , I am totally against it, I > dont want people following me. I would like to have the project being > followed. BTW there are several forks already doing great , I think > promoting several forks is not a bad idea. > > The thing is quite clear, the lacuna exist in Fineract CN , that can be > resolved by discussion Around the project architecture and slowly moving it > towards a greater height, but for that we might need a new governance model. > > Where can I suggest a new governance model, because the existing model > only represent few . So unless we move from that philosophy we won't be > able to change other things related to the project that which are our mere > reflection. > > I have already presented my views last year, I am now ready with new novel > methods related to moving Fineract CN into a complete distributed > architecture that we could participate in the new wave of web3 that is > going on. > > Thanks > I hope , this is clear > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 10:05 PM Myrle Krantz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Saransh, >> >> The Apache Fineract PMC members are appointed by the Apache board. The >> board almost always ratifies the suggestions of the Fineract PMC. Awasum >> Yannick, the Vice President of Apache Fineract, has already shared with you >> documentation on how the Fineract PMC comes to those suggestions. Your >> response to him was dismissive, disrespectful, and entitled. As was your >> response in the last couple of days to several other people who didn't give >> you things that you have demanded. Several of the people you have been >> rude to are well-liked and respected in The ASF and in the Fineract >> community. I could be reading the room wrong, but I do not believe the >> Apache Fineract PMC is inclined to appoint you to their midst. >> >> The board has a strong interest in promoting and enabling healthy >> communities, and for that reason they will very very very likely defer to >> the Apache Fineract PMC. If I were a board member (and I was a board >> member recently), I would likely question your PMC appointment, even if the >> Fineract PMC were to suggest it. >> >> If you believe a community exists here that is not represented by the >> Apache Fineract PMC, then what you actually want is a new project. You can >> discuss this with the Apache Incubator. But if I were a member of the >> Apache Incubator PMC (and I am), I would vote against a fork of Apache >> Fineract. >> >> You can fork or copy the code to another forum if you like. But as one >> of the main architects of Fineract CN, I can tell you for certain: I would >> not follow you, nor would I recommend anyone else do so. >> >> And even if you succeed at forking the community and the code (very very >> very unlikely), what you can't do is call it Fineract, or Fineract CN. >> You'll have to find a new name for it. >> >> Best Regards, >> Myrle >> >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 5:52 PM Saransh Sharma <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Thanks KAG for clarifying but in my opinion the term self is not the >>> focus,let me state the context for you here, that this is regarding the >>> decision making or rather consensus from the community. But the term is >>> misleading and needs to be modified . >>> >>> What if the community or the volunteers want to select PMC ?As I have >>> read its a closed system to select a PMC, >>> >>> Is there any provision for that ? Then we have an open system. Current >>> system and selection of those who get to decide most of the stuff happens >>> behind the scenes like selection of PMC could we do it openly? >>> >>> Right now the participation of the project happens via the PMC and >>> committers and developers are left behind since they don't hold any right >>> over the project direction. This plagues the direction of the project since >>> only handful are there to select or vote out. We need to empower all the >>> participants through some common exchange of value system. Like users , >>> developers who could vote for PMC selection. >>> Let me know your thoughts >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 5:56 PM Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sep 21, 2021, at 8:03 AM, Saransh Sharma <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Awasum for your reference >>>> >>>> Apache Projects are overseen by a self-selected team >>>> >>>> >>>> Saransh for your reference. >>>> >>>> >>>> Wrong. >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks and regards, >>> >>> Saransh Sharma >>> Research Partner >>> >>> This mail is governed by Muellners® IT policy. >>> The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents >>> may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from >>> disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if >>> this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert >>> the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any >>> attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents >>> of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly >>> prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be >>> monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure >>> compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails >>> are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be >>> intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed >>> to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail. >>> >> > > -- > Thanks and regards, > > Saransh Sharma > Research Partner > > This mail is governed by Muellners® IT policy. > The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents > may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from > disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if > this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert > the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any > attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents > of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly > prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be > monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure > compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails > are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be > intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed > to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail. >
