On 7 March 2015 at 01:55, Simon Phipps <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Andrea Pescetti <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On 06/03/2015 Dave Barton wrote: > > > >> OK! One last attempt to clarify and resolve a trivial issue, that has > >> become clouded in misunderstanding and mistranslated into some kind of > >> "bike-shedding" subject. > >> > > > > ...and misunderstood (or portrayed) as a transparency issue, when the > > answer to your question on who is moderating the API list can readily be > > found at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6095 and needed no > > further discussion. > > > ... which is of course the first place anyone would think to look! Just > needs a "beware of the leopard" sign :-) > > Seriously, there's a community issue here. Those of us not on the PMC > discovered accidentally that apparently harmless updates Kay proposed -- > and was already implementing -- had been vetoed for undocumented reasons by > unknown voices in a secret venue. Doesn't sound like the Apache Way. > > I believe the continued discussion is because of that and the strong > reaction to asking about it, rather than the details of how and why to list > the moderators (which to me still seems obvious, uncontroversial, modestly > beneficial and best done simply). It begs the question why that reaction > happened. >
You are opening a very important issue here. This moderator subject was, but should never have been discussed in private. During my first round as PMC, and now in my second round, I can see the private@ is being wrongly used (in my opinion, with my PMC hat on) to have long discussions which could just as well be public. I am convinced that the PMC is NOT doing this on purpose, but simply because they forget. Without disclosing content here are some interesting numbers: private@aoo compared to dev@aoo March: 53 on private@, 93 on dev@ Feb: 347 on private@, 400 on dev@ Jan: 111 on private@, 542 on dev@ Numbers are taken from the mail archives, and might be off by a couple. I am a member of several projects and it is fair to say that none of the other private lists I follow have a similar relationship. Typically private@ in the projects I follow count for 5-10% of the mails. I agree with Simon that we have a community issue here (thanks Simon for pointing it out, I had not made the connection between moderators and the use of private@) Some of the PMC are trying to stop the mail flood and remind the PMC group to make the thread publicly, but it seems to be something that takes time. I for one will do, as I did in the beginning of this thread (and got quite flamed for it) disclose my own opinion and as much as I can from private@ without breaking the rules. I believe it is high time to discuss this issue openly...and hopefully not only contributors but also comitters will raise their voice. rgds jan I. S. >
