Much like we can use GPL compilers, we can use GPL website serving software to serve our websites if we like. We just can't put it in the actual products that we expect end users to take and then use elsewhere.
- Shane On 9/6/2011 10:23 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
Forum code isn't something the PPMC is responsible for overseeing. That responsibility is with infra, and those folks need to be part of infra in order for the proper oversight to be applied. IOW it'd probably be both infra and the PPMC "voting" in forum admins: the PPMC to put them on the PPMC, and infra for giving them access to the host so they can modify the code according to infra's standards.________________________________ From: Rob Weir<[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 10:10 AM Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Joe Schaefer<[email protected]> wrote:Clearly you didn't read the whole sentence in context. You certainly cannot delegate away someone'sPPMC voting rights on new committers, but that wouldn'tbe something I'd call a management/oversightaspect of the forums.Well, we both need to read more carefully then, since that was exactly the analogy I was using in my original note: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.You came back with saying that "ALL" oversight could be delegated. Sorry if I misinterpreted that as a response to my hypothetical. The relevance is this: Forum admins can change the code on the forum. Ordinarily that would be something that we would restricted to a project committer, with iCLA, correct? Do any other Apache projects have websites where the code is changed by non-committers (aside from community wikis)? Given that, would you then agree that an admin (as a committer) should also be approved by the PPMC? But if you agree with that, then what about the current ability for a forum admin to assign admin rights to others? That's all I was getting at. I think the analogy was apt. Sorry if it wasn't as clear as it could have been. -RobTwo different animals.________________________________ From: Rob Weir<[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 9:44 AM Subject: Re: [RT] Create a second incubator podling - the ooo forums 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]>
