On 10/17/2011 6:28 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 6:16 PM, MiguelAngel<[email protected]> wrote:
El 17/10/11 23:09, Rob Weir escribió:
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
Hi Rob,
Forgive me, but my understanding of English is not very good, only a
forums volunteer.
Please could you explain in a more understandable words?.
I would like interpret right what you have writen.
Thanks in advance.
-Miguel Ángel.
Sure. In an Apache project, there are only a few situations were we
require a vote. One is to approve new committers or PMC members.
Another is to approve a release. For other decisions we operate by
"lazy consensus". This means that if there are no objections to a
proposal, then the person who makes the proposal can go forward and
implement it. No vote is required.
I'd prefer that we do not have an unnecessary vote when there is a
clear consensus to go forward with the forums. Having unnecessary
votes might suggest that in the future other decisions might be
deficient if they do not also have unnecessary votes. I don't want to
set that expectation. I don't want us to make the decision making
process in the project less efficient.
Personally, I wouldn't worry too much about the precedent of having
unnecessary votes. While Apache projects are encouraged to have clear
rules for decision making (so it's easy for newcomers to understand),
it's also expected that as a project evolves it's community, it may
choose - through clear discussions - to change it's rules. But I digress.
JFDI mean "Just F***n' Do It". In other words, once it is clear that
there are no objections, then stop talking about, just do it. The
idea is to eliminate needless discussion on the list. There are many
other things we need to discuss and resolve. We should take the
proposals that we agree on off the list and start implementing them.
I think we need someone to actually lead this migration process. I'd
suggest that they indeed just start doing it - and keeping the list
apprised of what they plan to do for each step. A leader here doesn't
necessarily have to be the person who copies the databases, but more
someone to organize it and ensure it all gets done (and communicated,
especially within the forums).
Note also that the proposal explicitly notes "Forum admins must become
committers", and that [VOTE]s *are* always required to add any new
committers to a project. I'm not sure how many forum admins really need
to be voted in, although we'd certainly welcome iCLAs (even without
being a committer) from any of the forum organizers if they feel
comfortable signing one. And I think we can start the migration first,
without worrying about committer bits unless there's a specific reason
(especially with Andrew's note that the server is going away somewhat soon!)
So thanks for submitting the proposal. It was discussed and no one
objected. Congratulations. Now the hard work begins....
-Rob
- Shane
