-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jacek Laskowski wrote: > > Shouldn't *your* decision be voted as well or at least discussed here > openly, with the community to find out how they feel about our > cooperation/openness? What message are we sending out if *you* step > out and change the rules just like that?
The message that I'm in receipt of numerous messages expressing concerns, many by people who feel intimidated about raising them publicly. The message that hints and nudges and commentary have been inadequate to the task of changing things such that the concerns are allayed. The message that the continued existence -- over months -- of these concerns represents a situation detrimental to the project. The message that this is an Apache project, not a Codehaus or SourceForge one, and that I personally am ultimately responsible to Apache for its healthy functioning. Forcing approval to happen in the open rather than by default will either alter the nature of code changes or it won't. If it does the concerns may have foundation; if it doesn't they should be put to rest thereby. This is not something I did either lightly or arbitrarily. - -- #ken P-|} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBRHGbWZrNPMCpn3XdAQLgZAQAxXyzqkZoNL0VxaGOe3mxmXdrm1Xm7MMU UPRmZb+z+9lyptjf2ifBAn/t7xblcgdQ2xK3tLjv6xpQY9BhOmdv8inArC099HsA zMXRT3+dFU0DxzcyVC5dICG3YNQ+HK4yjmnvnuT/3xvfgueFRhddQp0CYZ71oDXU +I8iM6pb1I4= =2DEb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
