Rob, It is an interesting social observation that distrust is not exemplary of being trustworthy. (Distrust is a kind of permission to be righteously untrustworthy, as is too easily demonstrated in world affairs as well as closer to home in regard to specific events already discussed on this list.)
In my thinking, the first act of being trustworthy is being trusting of those you want to recognize you as trustworthy. Enough about that. I do want to disassociate AOOo from the ASF record over the years. That is not the AOOo record. AOOo is not even six months old. AOOo needs to establish its trustworthiness the old-fashioned way, and it is not by inheritance or even by association. Not yet. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 09:12 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Neutral / shared security list ... On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Florian Effenberger <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > it is really amazing how much hot air can be produced for such a topic. > > Folks, it's rather easy. After the recent discussions and the history of > this topic, it becomes obvious, that neutral grounds are important. > > Neutral grounds mean: > - no domain name related to Apache, OOo, TDF or LibO > - no hosting at one of these entities > - members of the list from both parties (and of course other third parties > that make sense) > - admins of the list from both parties > Sorry, but you build an incredible about of distrust in others if you express such irrational distrust in AOOo. I'd have extreme hesitation to work with anyone who exhibs such vehement distrust of an 11 year old open source foundation that produces 5 of the top 10 open source projects, and which has a stellar reputation in the industry, including its treatment of security vulnerabilities. -Rob [ ... ]
