On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote: > They may be having a final vote on their side and there is an expectation of > some sort of formality here with regard to our ratification of the proposal. > > There was never a declaration of lazy consensus. >
You look for lazy consensus when you have doubt. You vote when you must. When neither apply, the JFDI. -Rob > Also this is the wrong thread for continuing the discussion. (Sorry, I wasn't > paying attention when I replied here.) > > - Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 14:09 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Forums down: SQL Error: Too many connections [1040] > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Rob, >> >> There was an update to the Forums Proposal based on some of the comments. >> The >> message about that is >> <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201110.mbox/%3cCAN7m23S1QRBvhoUc4niJ3rRuQvJ3kNt-v_5=0lxim_bshpg...@mail.gmail.com%3e>: >> >> I mentioned >> >> 1. Changing "sign the ICLA" to "become a committer" in part C. >> 2. dropping "ASF" from part H. >> >> on the forum and got a couple of positive responses and no objections, >> so I made the change on the wiki. >> > > OK. If there are no objections in the forum, and no objections > expressed on the list, then why the hell are we voting? IMHO, JFDI. > Welcome aboard, Forum Volunteers! > > -Rob > > >> Francis >> >> That's the last communication from the Forum Team that I see. >> >> - Dennis >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 13:13 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Forums down: SQL Error: Too many connections [1040] >> >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Regarding the Forum proposal: Assuming the discussion on it stays quiet, it >>> goes to [VOTE] after midnight UTC tonight. >>> >> >> Was there going to be a revised proposal that takes into account the >> comments received? Or was the preference to ignore all the feedback >> and go to a vote on the original proposal? >> >> -Rob >> >>> I suggest that a backup and transfer to the pilot version on Apache >>> infrastructure be done at once, by someone set up to do that, although it >>> is >>> not possible to bring it up in place of the current service until the dots >>> are connected. >>> >>> - Dennis >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 12:18 >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Forums down: SQL Error: Too many connections [1040] >>> >>> >>> On Oct 17, 2011, at 11:53 AM, Andrew Rist wrote: >>> >>>> That was me - I am able to do some admin tasks on this box. >>>> I am not able to provide any reasonable response time on issues like this, >>>> and I am not able to expand access to the env. >>>> We need to look at transitioning to the Apache hosted Forum and Wiki >>>> immediately. >>> >>> +1. I know that Gavin raised his hand on the Infrastructure side. You >>> raised >>> your hand on the database dump side. >>> >>> Do we have Drew for the WIki? >>> >>> Where are "we" with the Forum proposal? >>> >>>> Also, we will soon be losing hosting for *.services.openoffice.org >>>> (I believe the Forum and the Wiki are the last major properties there) >>> >>> By soon losing hosting for *.services.openoffice.org what do you mean? Do >>> you mean days, weeks, or a month? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> >>>> >>>> Andrew >>>> >>>> On 10/17/2011 11:16 AM, RGB ES wrote: >>>>> It seems forums are working now >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
