On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:33 AM Daniel Sahlberg <daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > *thread reply* > > I think everyone should take a deep breath and then we should re-start the > conversation with the purpose of learning and improving because at the moment > it seems that emotions are way to high. > > As I see it - and as usual, I'm new to the party so I don't have historical > context: > > * Subversion release process dictate to announce first, update website later. > There is a reason for it but we can improve on the process. I've raised this > at dev@ and received positive feedback from stsp. > * The RM an honest mistake and forgot to update the download page on the > website. He has admitted and apologized. No problem, we all make mistakes, > right? > * Moderation rejected the announce mail quite harshly. I would agree that the > missing links was reasonable cause to /hold back/ the announcement, but I > think it was done in a way (tone and outright rejection instead of reaching > out "hey, did you forget to update the download page?") that didn't invite to > further communication. (I'm not comenting on the KEYS file issue, I wasn't > around last time and I don't have the time to look up the policy, but from > what I understand this was a minor issue). > > As far as I understand everyone in the Subversion project are volunteers. I > don't know about the moderators but I assume they are as well. We need to > treat eachother with respect and try to find the most efficient way for the > community as a whole and not just "looking from the perspectiv of ****". > > Kind regards, > Daniel Sahlberg
I agree that there needs to be respect and appreciation for everyone's volunteer efforts here, and in the spirit of openness and cooperation I have a suggestion to make: Since it seems that "not being spam" isn't enough to make an announcement, and this is a long standing issue (it goes back farther than last May), it would be immensely helpful, both for us and for the moderators, if there were publicly posted rules that clearly outline: "this is what moderators check; this is the criteria moderators use to accept or reject an email to this list." This would clearly set expectations and help to prevent the repeating issues that I'm sure are frustrating to the list operators, and I know are frustrating for us. Thanks to everyone for your support. Nathan
