On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Joe Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote: > Where did you get that from in what I wrote? >
Your use of the term "ALL" (in bold characters) -Rob > > > >>________________________________ >>From: Rob Weir <[email protected]> >>To: [email protected] >>Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 9:39 AM >>Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums >> >>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]> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >>
