Michael,
We're not going to reach an agreement here. I don't like to have people trying to enter through a window when they've been told they can't enter at the door. You are entitling yourself "the website team". It's misleading and it has never been the case. Not everyone was for Drupal and you know it, in fact, Drupal was but one possible candidate. You come back again with your Drupal proposition and you want us to come back on our decision to appoint people. That's not going to happen. Let me make this clear: the SC at present cannot only be a conflict resolution body. It would be very diminishing anyway, if you read our bylaws. Right now it has to show leadership because everything has to be built. The SC built LibreOffice and is developing the Document Foundation. Which means there is more, much more than a website to it. All around you, all around us, we now have over a hundred (in fact hundreds of contributors) developing the software and being the community. What you're showing here is that you care more about Drupal than anything else and you care more about disrupting our work than contributing. We could be playing the blame game for days and months now. We've already been playing this for weeks. So now what I'm going to ask you is to choose between: contributing productively to the LibreOffice project and stop making demands, or leave this mailing list and the LibreOffice project. We all have better things to do than wasting our time. Thank you, -- charles.h.schulz Sent with Sparrow On mercredi 19 janvier 2011 at 05:19, Michael Wheatland wrote: > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 6:32 AM, charles.h.schulz > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I've read several comments about the SC shunning away from its > > responsibilities. > > I think it would be fair to remember that the SC is a group of people (who > > are not perfect) who had the guts to break away from Oracle. They had the > > guts to leave a project they had been contributing to for years (sometimes > > more than ten) and to face difficulties, uncertainty, doubt, the hatred > > feelings of people they had been working with (some Oracle employees). The > > SC members got a vision and are working hard to achieve it. > > > > > > IMO the problem has not been the SC shunning away from > responsibilities, on the contrary. The Website team has self > organised. The problem is the SC getting involved and over-ruling > consensus and negotiated decisions made in individual lists without > going back and reading the history. This is exaserbated with many of > the discussions that SHOULD be on the website list being on the > Discuss or SC-Discuss list. We need a united team for each > mini-project, not the SC going one way and the community going > another. Have the discussion ONCE in the right place: The Webste > mailing list! > > > > To say that we shun away from our responsibilities is I think unfair. But > > we certainly made mistakes. One of them is that we felt a website team > > could organize itself and that the mailing lists in general could run > > smoothly. It was often the case that it worked (and it's working) but when > > it comes to the website, it's obviously not true. We should have understood > > that something was wrong when the Drupal fans continued to discuss, > > unabashed and unfazed by the results of the CMS platform contest that had > > *clearly* nominated Silverstripe and tagged Drupal as *an option in the > > future*. We should have shouted and taken clear actions when we saw this > > website was being sunken into unproductive messages about a solution we > > hadn't picked but that some people felt they were still entitled to pursue. > > > > > > Florian's message on the CMS result was clear "Silverstripe as a > started with plans to migrate to Drupal". Florian as the website SC > rep was actively involved in many discussions about this development. > Once the people working on the Drupal site realised that the > Silverstripe site was under resourced despite the statement that > Christian made to the SC, we acted: > > I started a mailing list thread to regroup and start to coordinate the > Silverstripe development after David had finished the initial design: > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Regroup-and-further-development-of-the-website-s-td2191011.html > > The response to this from David and other SC members was insulting and > belittling for the existing website team as it insinuated that we were > not competent in managing our own part of the project: > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Regroup-and-further-development-of-the-website-s-tp2191011p2191098.html > > The most recent decision by the SC, appointing leaders, without even a > mention about it to the website mailing list reinforces this disregard > for the great members who already exist in this team. > In choosing the four 'Leaders' there was not a vote or even mention of > this within the website mailing list, hence there has been NO > community consultation, collaboration or self governance. As far as I > can see, the SC is not being used as it should be, a conflict > resolution tool, but rather as a manager dictating to their employees > who is in charge and what work they must do, even without themselves > being elected. > > > > > I am going therefore to apologize to several people and for several things > > (see below). One thing I'm not going to apologize for, however, is to have > > a written and recorded decision that the SC chose one solution that some > > people haven't read about or listened to. Our message was clear ever since > > the beginning: Silverstripe, and perhaps, later, Drupal. We cannot be > > blamed for the mistakes of other people. > > > > > > No. It wasn't, Quite the opposite. > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.website/592 > But, again, those working on the Drupal development were about to > start work on Silverstripe, but we were shunned by David and now the > SC. > > > > To all; I would like us to come back into a productive mood. We're here to > > contribute to our present website, not to something else someone feels > > should be better. There's plenty of ideas out there, plenty of people who > > would rather have us do something completely different: but at the end of > > the day, we work on one project, LibreOffice and comments, "do this" & "you > > should do that" are not really welcome here. > > > > > > I agree. I think the best way to get back to a productive mood is for > the SC to take a step back and stop making decisions that are contrary > to the self-organised website team. We have proven we can do it with > the Drupal development, it was very well organised, now we know that > there was NOBODY apart from Christian that was ready to work on > Silverstripe, with the exception of David at the last minute, we were > in the progress of restructuring the self organised team and the SC > comes and overrules yet another decision without being involved or > even reading the mailing list. > > > > Expect a more hands-on approach of this mailing list. We're grateful for > > contributions, but we're not here to stand the desires of people who cannot > > understand that Free Software does not equal chaos and always following > > their decisions. The Steering Committee (and soon the Board of Directors) > > is here to take decisions as well as other entities (see our bylaws). We're > > not dictatorial, because we owe you transparency and that our bylaws > > clearly show no one can have absolute or even too much powers. But what we > > want to set is an atmosphere in mailing lists that are focused on > > contributions and not on fruitless discussions. > > > > > > I don't really want a more "hands-on" approach. I would much prefer an > open "Hands off" approach where decisions made inside mailing lists > are respected and implemented. > We moved to LibreOffice expecting 'community governance', not another > team of non-elected members who it seems occasionally actively block > ideas and developments they do not agree with. > > > > In the end, all of our actions, individually, collectively, can only be > > measured on one criteria: contribution. This is the way we move forward, > > this is why we are "Libre". > > > > > > Personally, I don't feel very "Libre" at the moment. > > I believe that the ONLY way forward is to withdraw the latest decision > to appoint leaders and again allow us to self organise as we did > before, despite what David or other members of the SC would prefer. > The SC can't make every decision and must trust and believe in their > teams if this community is even going to get off the ground. Releasing > the software is only the first step to success, community is the key. > > This is NOT a disagreement about CMSs! it is about building community. > > Michael Wheatland. > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/ > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
