Dennis E. Hamilton wrote on Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 08:24:40 -0700: > We are also not in control at this time, as far as I know. The > registry information still has Oracle Corporation as the Registrant > Organization. > > When the domain transfer at the registrar happens, we can worry about > take-down notices and other legal requests made to the registrant. > I assume that there is a link on every current-site page for where > takedown notices can be sent (it doesn't have to be to the registrant, > it can be to the hosting service, something we can be acting as, > perhaps?) and that would likely be something that needs to be fixed > once the domain points to pages in PPMC custody. >
The WHOIS details will contain addresses that infra@ and/or secretary@ read. > I don't see this as a barrier to the migration approach that I am > endorsing. But it is a good concrete situation to make a point of > dealing with. Thanks for pointing that out. Is the bugzilla a good > place to start compiling these? > > - Dennis > > PS: Amazing that we have graduated from language about property to now > speaking of control. I am anxious for responsibility and > accountability to have their turn. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 08:04 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Apache Way community moderation rationale > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Owning the domain name and owning the existing site are two different > > things. Apache does not "own" the content on the current live site that is > > not part of the Oracle CLA. > > > > It is not about ownership. It is about control. If someone uploaded > illegal material, pirated software, etc., Apache would get the > take-down notices. We could not argue that we did not own the pirated > software. The PPMC is responsible for the moderation of the forums, > directly or via delegation. There is no hiding from this > responsibility merely because user content is under their own > copyright. That would be silly. > > -Rob > > > I'm 100% behind Shane's view of how we could migrate in a gradual, > > transparent way that engages the impacted community (not the one defined as > > those people who are here on the podling already). > > > > My only concern now is that we do not take steps that make that migration > > an option, however we conclude what the end game will look like. > > > > - Dennis > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 07:48 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Apache Way community moderation rationale > > > > OpenOffice.org is an Apache domain. It will have Apache branding, > > etc. We can't pretend that site is at arm's length. > > > > -Rob > > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 > >> > >> I completely support the high-level migration road-map you sketch for > >> artifacts and services currently in custody of the openoffice.org domain > >> sites and not part of the Oracle SGA. > >> > >> In the final paragraph, though, perhaps you meant to say > >> > >> " Given the past history and the fact that this > >> non-code content is not currently under an *apache.org* domain, it is > >> possible to technically migrate a lot of stuff without having finalized > >> the policy issues. (Note: source code and items under apache.org > >> domains are different, and should discuss policy issues sooner rather > >> than later)." > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Shane Curcuru [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 07:23 > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Apache Way community moderation rationale > >> > >> [ ... ] > >> > >> ---- > >> NOTE: OOo is a huge project with a very diverse set of well-known > >> services, and, like, a LOT of users. To graduate to a top level project > >> will require significant changes to how some of these services are > >> provided in the future under any Apache marks or domain names. > >> > >> Given the scale and breadth of services, and the changes in community, I > >> think it's appropriate to plan on plenty of time to make the complete > >> migrations of these services. Likewise, I believe it may be permissible > >> to take over hosting some services in the technical sense under the > >> openoffice.org domain - in the short term - that we might not normally > >> consider as managed fully by the Apache Way yet. > >> > >> One way to think about services migration - to separate out policy > >> dependencies from technical ones - is: > >> > >> - Ensure several PPMC members have root / admin / whatever level of > >> access is required to give them oversight, so they can review behavior > >> on the service. (first!) > >> > >> - Technically port the service to apache hardware (but not under an > >> apache.org domain yet) > >> > >> - Apply branding updates to the service > >> > >> - Decide final policy issues for moderation, etc. for the service > >> > >> Does that make sense? Given the past history and the fact that this > >> non-code content is not currently under an openoffice.org domain, it is > >> possible to technically migrate a lot of stuff without having finalized > >> the policy issues. (Note: source code and items under apache.org > >> domains are different, and should discuss policy issues sooner rather > >> than later) > >> > >> - Shane > >> > >> > > > > >
