Mike Baker wrote on 02.11.2017 16:59:
On 11/1/2017 5:18 PM, Hartmut Knaack wrote:
This raises some more questions: which terms and conditions did people
have
to approve to get an @openwrt.org address? Where can these terms and
conditions be found? Is every email sent from such an address supposed to
be discussed and approved by the group before it gets sent?
Furthermore: how many percent of "the group" needs to agree when it comes
to disabling someones address? 50% or 67%?
The issue is the use of an openwrt email address to make an announcement
on behalf of openwrt stating that openwrt had become lede without ever
discussing it. There were no warning signs, everybody from openwrt
suddenly found out that there was a new project and they had been kicked
out.
- Mike
I'm reading over Jows announcement over and over again, but can not see,
where he would announce it on behalf of openwrt. He has been using his
@openwrt.org, just like countless times before on the mailing list.
I can also not find the claim, that LEDE would be the successor of openwrt,
just that quite a lot of active developers would try to start a new project
with a different focus on certain issues.
I agree, that there were no warning signs on the public mailing list. But
still, what have been the terms and conditions for project email addresses?
How are sanctions decided?
And if I pick up your statement, that using an openwrt email address
implies that it is sent on behalf of openwrt (and thus, reviewed by the
project members and acknowledged by the majority), there should just be one
account for public relations (like version announcements, business
communication on behalf of the project).
I understand, that your feelings got hurt by the announcement, but your
reaction was not professional. So, IMHO you messed up, now deal with it.
Thanks,
Hartmut
_______________________________________________
Lede-dev mailing list
Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
