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 cases
requiring discreet usage of private@.
Talking about it here doesn't seem necessary. Who would disagree? Those of us
with PMC accountability need to make it so. It is expected of all PMCs.
- Dennis
More background, since volumes of private@ usage have been presented.
There are two matters that have been brought here recently although they had
wandered in and out of private@:
1. The changes to the PMC FAQ, involving a small comedy of errors (my
synopsis)
2. The concerns about the openoffice.org/why page on the cost of compliance
which also involved the Legal list and some private@ chiding by ASF
officials
The other major sources of recent volume on private@ involved private matters.
Sometimes these are resolved entirely without any public discussion (e.g.,
handling a request for or dealing with an issue about trademark usage, votes to
add new committers and/or PMC members).
Generally, sometimes there is a privately-raised concern that is discussed
until it is noticed that it has turned into a discussion that belongs on dev@
and not private@. It would be good to catch those earlier. It is up to the
PMC to be vigilant and execute on those.
Anything that involves policies impacting the project itself clearly must come
to dev@ if there is ever any sort of proposition that involves conduct of the
project and alignment of the community. A variety of privately-raised concerns
simply come and go, however, even if there is a significant flurry of
discussion at first.
There are some routine items that arise from time to time on private@ but do
not seem to introduce any major spurt in volume.
With regard to the relative silence of other PMCs, I suggest that Apache
OpenOffice has much greater reach into diverse communities and corresponding
areas of concern compared to many Apache projects. We are not homogenous and
we deal with many levels of participation and direction, much simply on account
of the magnitude of the software, the sites, the intended users, and the
history. We could be not so driven although I expect that would not resonate
on dev@, user@, or the forums.
-----Original Message-----
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 7, 2015 01:11
To: jan i
Cc: dev
Subject: community communication versus private PMC communication, WAS: PMC FAQ
update
Just realized, that many might jump over the old subject.
This issue is an important issue and should not be hidden behind another
subject.
rgds
jan i.
[ ... ]
> You are opening a very important issue here. This moderator subject was,
> but should never have been discussed in private.
>
> During my first round as PMC, and now in my second round, I can see the
> private@ is being wrongly used (in my opinion, with my PMC hat on) to
> have long discussions which could just as well be public. I am convinced
> that the PMC is NOT doing this on purpose, but simply because they forget.
>
> Without disclosing content here are some interesting numbers:
> private@aoo compared to dev@aoo
> March: 53 on private@, 93 on dev@
> Feb: 347 on private@, 400 on dev@
> Jan: 111 on private@, 542 on dev@
>
> Numbers are taken from the mail archives, and might be off by a couple.
>
> I am a member of several projects and it is fair to say that none of the
> other private lists I follow have a similar relationship. Typically private@
> in the projects I follow count for 5-10% of the mails.
>
> I agree with Simon that we have a community issue here (thanks Simon for
> pointing it out, I had not made the connection between moderators and the
> use of private@)
>
> Some of the PMC are trying to stop the mail flood and remind the PMC group
> to make the thread publicly, but it seems to be something that takes time.
> I for one will do, as I did in the beginning of this thread (and got quite
> flamed for it) disclose my own opinion and as much as I can from private@
> without breaking the rules.
>
> I believe it is high time to discuss this issue openly...and hopefully not
> only contributors but also comitters will raise their voice.
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
> S.
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
