On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Kay Schenk wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:00 PM, janI <j...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 29 July 2013 23:05, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Kay Schenk wrote: >>> >>>> >> http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/< >> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/> >>>> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with: >>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_**selected_2013-06 >>>> were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an issue >>>> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's >> decision >>>> to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals >>>> >>> >>> Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the >>> "aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been >>> discussed here first. >>> >> >> I like the WARNING.txt file, could we agree to use the same file for other >> "sensible" (not sure if that is the right word) areas ? I think of e.g. >> release notes. >> >> >>> >>> So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have a >>>> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion before >>>> new commits? >>>> >>> >>> I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all >>> significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the website. >>> Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny. >>> >> >> +1, lets not make it too complicated to work, that said with a smile !! For >> significant code changes, a discussion is a must, but I thought it was >> already policy ?
I'm ok with adding WARNING.txt as appropriate. I can see that there may be either of two types of warnings. Full RTC - where any change including additions should be discussed. Adds CTR and updates RTC - where changes to existing artifacts require discussion. The branding tree and release notes are examples of where this is in affect. It may be that changes are being made and reviewed during the discussion. We wouldn't be so strict. For example before the 4.1 release. Rob may start to create release notes by adding and then making a series of modifications. There would be a [DISCUSS] Starting release notes. We wouldn't need a discussion for every little change. It is more we want to be aware these are happening. The community can then help in very way from criticism to translation to whatever. Regards, Dave >> >> rgds >> jan I. >> >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Andrea. >>> >>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org< >> dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >>> >>> >> > > Here is some information on decision making/discussions: > > http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/decision-making.html > http://community.apache.org/committers/ > http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles > > I could not find any specific "rules" on when decision making should be > used. In OpenOffice, it is used on a regular basis for many different > changes, but WHEN to use it doesn't seem to be set in stone. And it looks > like, some projects have defined their own criteria. > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > MzK > > Success is falling nine times and getting up ten." > -- Jon Bon Jovi --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
