On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Joe Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote: > It's called delegation Rob, and it's done all the > time within the ASF. The PPMC can delegate ALL > > management/oversight aspects to whomever is on > the PPMC that is also involved with the forums. > > So long as 1 person on the PPMC is watching over > the activity, and anything noteworthy gets passed > along to the board via PPMC reports, it's a perfectly > humane way of conducting yourselves. >
So we can delegate selection of approval of committers to a single PPMC member? Really? -Rob > > > >>________________________________ >>From: Rob Weir <[email protected]> >>To: [email protected] >>Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 9:27 AM >>Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums >> >>On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Joe Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Up until a few days ago I thought we had one. >>> Move the forums over to the ASF, give the PPMC >>> and ASF members the full ability (upon request) >>> to oversee allcommunications within the forums, >>> and life goeson. I see no need for the Volunteers >>> to join the PPMC or anything like that, just keep >>> doing whatever you're doing and keep the PPMC abreast >>> of anything report-worthy when they need to report >>> to the board. If the Volunteers want to incorporate >>> some Apache-style voting processes into their ops, >>> go for it! >>> >>> >> >>And if I wanted to create a group called the "Calc developer >>volunteers", could we join the project, with the understanding the >>rest of the project would leave us alone? We would vote in our own >>committers, etc,. independently of the normal PMC process. We would >>conduct our business on restricted-access mailing lists, not visible >>to the public. But on request we'd allow PMC members to join these >>lists. >> >>Ignore for a second the IP implications. That is really a red >>herring. The point is meritocracy, decision making and PMC oversight. >>Think of similar analogies with non-release aspects of the project, >>like web site design, documentation, wikis, etc. >> >>Where else does Apache have a meritocracy embedded in a project that >>does not commune with the PMC? In an ideal world, where everything >>just worked, and there were never any disagreements or disputes, then >>this might work. But in that world we wouldn't need a PMC or an ASF >>Board either. In any case, we don't live in such a world. >> >>It is bizarre, but I hear people advocating for community >>fragmentation in the name of community unity. Having two parallel >>meritocracies within the same project is fragmentation. I don't see >>how we can call it anything else. >> >>-Rob >> >>> >>> >>>>________________________________ >>>>From: Rory O'Farrell <[email protected]> >>>>To: [email protected] >>>>Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 9:08 AM >>>>Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums >>>> >>>>On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 05:49:09 -0700 (PDT) >>>>Joe Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>><snip> >>>>> So to answer your questions, yes it certainly could be done >>>>> within the Apache structure. No it probably cannot be done >>>>> to host stuff here on behalf of some third party. >>>> >>>>Thanks, that is helpful in clarifying options. >>>> >>>>So to be hosted on Apache one would need to find some mechanism whereby a >>>>forum would fit into Apache; by your earlier post you do not think there is >>>>such a mechanism. Might Apache be prepared to modify (by extension) their >>>>structures to accomodate these? This becomes a problem for the legal >>>>draughtsmen, of course. The old rule of £minimal change" ought apply. >>>> >>>>I'm not asking for a change, just exploring the possibility of one. >>>> >>>>-- >>>>Rory O'Farrell <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >>
