Okay. I don’t think this is the place for this, but if you want the discussion here, I’ll respond.
>> Part of building community is allowing for the fact that there are different >> points of view > I'm all for that. Your actions seem to indicate otherwise. Declaring the PMC broken and it needs to be fixed doesn’t leave room for an opinion that it’s not broken to start with. "I think there are problems” or similar is much more productive than saying "things are broken and if we don’t fix them I’m resigning”. > - Recent events where calls for votes are vetoed and the attitude that only > certain types of contributions count towards committership. I'll be calling a > vote to try and rectify this and stop this from occurring again. Our own > guidelines spell out what we value for committership [2] - "The forms of > contribution are not limited to only code. It can also include code reviews, > helping out users on the mailing lists, documentation, testing, etc." this > matches with the Apache Way [3], which of one of the key concepts is > "communiy over code”. I’m not going into the details of a private discussion here, but nothing was vetoed (the fact that someone wrote “-1” to express displeasure over a suggestion and clearly stated afterwards that it was not meant as a veto is not a veto), and no one stated that specific types of contributions do not count. There was a discussion regarding whether a specific someone is “engaged in the community” which is an entirely subjective topic. > - Lack of openness. There been a few things done in private. If there is a > good reason for it, it should be brought up on the private list first and > discussed. But if possible everything should be done in the open, to build > community and trust. Just because something was done in a certain way during > Adobe incubation doesn't mean it should be done that way again. Openness is a > key concept of the Apache Way. Openness has more than one meaning. While openness does mean visible, it also means freedom. If doing something “by the book” is too restrictive for a specific task, I think it’s ridiculous to say “my way or the highway”. Instead of saying “if possible everything should be done in the open”, a more reasonable approach is “as much as practical should be done in the open”. Also, work done on Github is in the open — especially when there’s notifications to commit@ every time there’s a commit. Sometimes doing things privately for a period of time is the best way to actually get it done, and it’s in the best interests of the project to do it that way. As long as things are opened up and/or explained. That’s not a contradiction to openness. You talk about building community. Well, allowing flexibility in how things are done and making things easier on people goes a very long way in building community. Being too concerned with rules is stifling to a community. Yes. There are certain rules that need to be upheld, but we need to do what we can fro keeping rules from being painful and counterproductive. > - We only hear from a few voices. We are possibly in danger of falling below > the 3 active PMC members required for a top level project when though we have > 30+ PMC members. We need to encourage existing PMC member to speak up and be > involved or try and recruit more PMC members. I'm open to ideas on how to > make this happen. >> Don’t you think it’s a bit extreme declaring the PMC broken because some >> people disagree with you? > I don't see it that way - there have many issues in recent months and we've > had one other PMC member resign. I know I’ve hesitated to speak up because you’ve had very strong opinions and I’m not interested in making waves. I was not privy to the discussions prior to the member resigning, but maybe it had something to do with being told "you have to do things my way or you’re wrong”? Even if someone IS wrong about something, there are times when it’s better to let someone do something “wrong” for the sake of the greater “right”. Again, this goes back to the point of allowing for different points of view. Just some food for thought... Harbs P.S. I do value your viewpoint. It’s very valuable for a project to have someone who’s a stickler for the details and the rules. But, sometimes that does need to be tempered to allow for others who cannot work like that. (like me) ;-) Also, certain things CANNOT have rules by their very nature. On Aug 21, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > Hi, > >> Don’t you think it’s a bit extreme declaring the PMC broken because some >> people disagree with you? > I don't see it that way - there have many issues in recent months and we've > had one other PMC member resign. > >> Part of building community is allowing for the fact that there are different >> points of view > I'm all for that. > >> Anyone who’s not subscribed to private will have no idea what you’re >> referring to, so I think the private list is a better place for this >> discussion. > If you feel it should be moved there start a thread, but some of the > committers will not be able to see it. > > Thanks, > Justin
