On Sunday, March 8, 2015, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote:
On 08/03/2015 Simon Phipps wrote:
On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
What about actually doing something?
That, sir, is insulting. If you want to propose a resolution,
do so, but please do not
On 07/03/2015 Dave Barton wrote:
Simon Phipps wrote:
when one does not have access to the privileged
conversations of the PMC, actions that use those conversations as
justification appear hostile, as do dismissive PMC member reactions
Well, if it is true (and it is true) that the private list
On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org
wrote:
You are suggesting a usage pattern of the private list that is far beyond
reality.
I am not. I am pointing out there is no way for me to know, and that the
strong reactions to Dave's original (modest reasonable)
Andrea Pescetti wrote:
On 07/03/2015 Dave Barton wrote:
Simon Phipps wrote:
when one does not have access to the privileged
conversations of the PMC, actions that use those conversations as
justification appear hostile, as do dismissive PMC member reactions
Well, if it is true (and it is
On 08/03/2015 Simon Phipps wrote:
On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
What about actually doing something?
That, sir, is insulting. If you want to propose a resolution,
do so, but please do not attempt to hand out jobs.
Volunteering to do something is much more
I am not certain exactly what issue is proposed to be discussed here.
If you mean the over-use of private@ by the PMC, is there an issue to discuss?
Those of us on the PMC need to be attentive to minimizing private@ discussions
and bring to dev@ every discussion that is not one of the special
jan i wrote:
On Saturday, March 7, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
If you mean the over-use of private@ by the PMC, is there an issue to
discuss? Those of us on the PMC need to be attentive to minimizing private@
Well look at the numbers, I did not publish the numbers for 2014, but you
will
On Saturday, March 7, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:
I am not certain exactly what issue is proposed to be discussed here.
If you mean the over-use of private@ by the PMC, is there an issue to
discuss? Those of us on the PMC need to be attentive to minimizing
@openoffice.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Subject: Re: community communication versus private PMC communication, WAS: PMC
FAQ update
On Saturday, March 7, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:
I am not certain exactly what issue is proposed to be discussed here.
If you mean the over
Simon Phipps wrote:
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:
I'll ask one more time. What action is expected here on dev@ to impact
how the PMC uses private@ ?
I don't think there is any action that can be taken on dev@ beyond pointing
out to
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:
I'll ask one more time. What action is expected here on dev@ to impact
how the PMC uses private@ ?
I don't think there is any action that can be taken on dev@ beyond pointing
out to others here that, when one
11 matches
Mail list logo
