Myrle , I am not demanding anything from anyone let me put this straight , I think I have agreed to whatever has happened and am trying to improvise on the project.
This is my intention , that how the whole project is structured , and to me it gives the impression that the representation of the community by and large is handed by just few. I would like that to happen not on merit. I would like to get out of these titles , this is more about the project movement. I might not want a new project , I have been contributing to the existing project now if you want me to prove in your bounded closed reality that's quite not fair ,i am not up for such low level integrity checks, (You have to be like us , then you are the PMC, or steering committee e) Actually the new project should not need to be a fork of Apache Fineract . If you change the architecture of the project then its no longer same. Again, you are making it about an individual , I am totally against it, I dont want people following me. I would like to have the project being followed. BTW there are several forks already doing great , I think promoting several forks is not a bad idea. The thing is quite clear, the lacuna exist in Fineract CN , that can be resolved by discussion Around the project architecture and slowly moving it towards a greater height, but for that we might need a new governance model. Where can I suggest a new governance model, because the existing model only represent few . So unless we move from that philosophy we won't be able to change other things related to the project that which are our mere reflection. I have already presented my views last year, I am now ready with new novel methods related to moving Fineract CN into a complete distributed architecture that we could participate in the new wave of web3 that is going on. Thanks I hope , this is clear On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 10:05 PM Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote: > Saransh, > > The Apache Fineract PMC members are appointed by the Apache board. The > board almost always ratifies the suggestions of the Fineract PMC. Awasum > Yannick, the Vice President of Apache Fineract, has already shared with you > documentation on how the Fineract PMC comes to those suggestions. Your > response to him was dismissive, disrespectful, and entitled. As was your > response in the last couple of days to several other people who didn't give > you things that you have demanded. Several of the people you have been > rude to are well-liked and respected in The ASF and in the Fineract > community. I could be reading the room wrong, but I do not believe the > Apache Fineract PMC is inclined to appoint you to their midst. > > The board has a strong interest in promoting and enabling healthy > communities, and for that reason they will very very very likely defer to > the Apache Fineract PMC. If I were a board member (and I was a board > member recently), I would likely question your PMC appointment, even if the > Fineract PMC were to suggest it. > > If you believe a community exists here that is not represented by the > Apache Fineract PMC, then what you actually want is a new project. You can > discuss this with the Apache Incubator. But if I were a member of the > Apache Incubator PMC (and I am), I would vote against a fork of Apache > Fineract. > > You can fork or copy the code to another forum if you like. But as one of > the main architects of Fineract CN, I can tell you for certain: I would not > follow you, nor would I recommend anyone else do so. > > And even if you succeed at forking the community and the code (very very > very unlikely), what you can't do is call it Fineract, or Fineract CN. > You'll have to find a new name for it. > > Best Regards, > Myrle > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 5:52 PM Saransh Sharma <sara...@muellners.org> > wrote: > >> >> Thanks KAG for clarifying but in my opinion the term self is not the >> focus,let me state the context for you here, that this is regarding the >> decision making or rather consensus from the community. But the term is >> misleading and needs to be modified . >> >> What if the community or the volunteers want to select PMC ?As I have >> read its a closed system to select a PMC, >> >> Is there any provision for that ? Then we have an open system. Current >> system and selection of those who get to decide most of the stuff happens >> behind the scenes like selection of PMC could we do it openly? >> >> Right now the participation of the project happens via the PMC and >> committers and developers are left behind since they don't hold any right >> over the project direction. This plagues the direction of the project since >> only handful are there to select or vote out. We need to empower all the >> participants through some common exchange of value system. Like users , >> developers who could vote for PMC selection. >> Let me know your thoughts >> >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 5:56 PM Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 21, 2021, at 8:03 AM, Saransh Sharma <sara...@muellners.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Awasum for your reference >>> >>> Apache Projects are overseen by a self-selected team >>> >>> >>> Saransh for your reference. >>> >>> >>> Wrong. >>> >> >> >> -- >> Thanks and regards, >> >> Saransh Sharma >> Research Partner >> >> This mail is governed by Muellners® IT policy. >> The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents >> may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from >> disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if >> this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert >> the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any >> attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents >> of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly >> prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be >> monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure >> compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails >> are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be >> intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed >> to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail. >> > -- Thanks and regards, Saransh Sharma Research Partner This mail is governed by Muellners® IT policy. The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail.
