Andrea Pescetti wrote: > On 07/03/2015 Dave Barton wrote: >> Simon Phipps wrote: >>> when one does not have access to the privileged >>> conversations of the PMC, actions that use those conversations as >>> justification appear hostile, as do dismissive PMC member reactions > > Well, if it is true (and it is true) that the private list is visible to > 400+ people (more than this list's subscribers) and that, while mistakes > are surely possible and surely have happened, the private list is not > being abused and discussions that do not belong there are often moved to > the dev list with full context, then I feel it's important to point it > out. You are suggesting a usage pattern of the private list that is far > beyond reality. > > Apache OpenOffice is a model of transparency compared to other, even > open source, projects. The importance some people give to private > conversations is really, really exaggerated. But if we continue > discussing this we fall easily in a "conspiracy theory" model, so I > prefer that we get more concrete. On my behalf, be reassured that when I > see a private conversation that ought to be public I will point it out.
I have not and as far as I can tell neither has Simon, claimed a general lack of transparency within the project and I totally reject your suggestion that I have made any "exaggerated" claims or I am touting some kind of "conspiracy theory". However, there was a failure of communication in the original "PMC FAQ update" thread. >> +100% >> Thank you Simon. > > What about actually doing something? Is such a hostile and insulting attack necessary? When I first posted to the original thread I had already collected the information I thought was being asked for and was ready to "ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING" by updating the page, if that was acceptable. > You Simon and Dave combined already > have all privileges needed to keep the page with moderators' names > updated if you believe it's really important for you. If you two pledge > to keep it updated, I, for one, will see my primary reason for removing > names (i.e., they are blatantly outdated) addressed. If you are willing > to help, we can surely fix details. This is no longer about the trivial issue of keeping moderator's names on a page, or if Simon and I think it is important. The decision on that matter has been taken and as far as I am concerned it is now closed. The issue here is that in the original thread both Simon and I asked totally innocent, non-controversial questions and received answers which ranged from, the information is already there (if you know where to find it), to being accused of being on some kind of name publishing ego trip. I do not question that the ASF strives to be open and transparent, but in the area of community building the AOO project is sadly lacking. Comments, such as you have expressed here are, to say the least, discouraging. > Regards, > Andrea. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
