On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Simon Phipps <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 13 Jul 2011, at 15:10, Sam Ruby wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Simon Phipps <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 13 Jul 2011, at 14:29, Sam Ruby wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Simon Phipps <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 13 Jul 2011, at 12:55, Sam Ruby wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> If a project decides to create a canonical place to find things like >>>>>> extensions and templates then we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate >>>>>> active oversight of that repository. >>>>> >>>>> To clarify this, Sam: Do you mean that any external repository would >>>>> need to be under the sole oversight of the (P)PMC, or are you simply >>>>> indicating that involvement in an external shared repository would need >>>>> to be with the consent of the (P)PMC? >>>> >>>> You might have snipped a wee bit too much there. But the short answer >>>> is: got a concrete proposal? >>> >>> Yes, I proposed that the project redirect to the LibreOffice repository for >>> as long as necessary to bridge the construction phase of the Apache project. >> >> (1) Is that what the PPMC wants? >> >> (2) Is this consistent with the Apache Branding Policy? > > I believe those questions were implied, and I'm sure the PPMC will consider > them. However, my question was asking you for clarification of your assertion > that "we will expect the (P)PMC to demonstrate active oversight of that > repository".
It is getting hard for my to follow what questions are explicit and what questions are implicit then. Going back to the actual question you asked above: clearly the TDF has an external repository without the sole oversight by this PPMC, and that does not pose a problem. You've suggested multiple times that this project makes redirects of various kinds to LibreOffice sites. Until I see some evidence that this is what the PPMC wants, I will not comment further on that suggestion. > S. - Sam Ruby
