On Jan 21, 2009, at 06:13, Stephen Lau wrote: > Here's my proposed statement: > > The OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) observed with dismay last > week, Sun's failure to abide by the homepage review policy setup, > and agreed upon in good faith by both the OGB and Sun Microsystems > (via its OGB Liason) earlier this year. While it was subsequently > removed a few days later, we are disappointed that Sun felt it > necessary to breach its previous agreement. We, again, encourage > Sun to be a good corporate citisen of the OpenSolaris community it > helped create, and to work within the processes setup and agreed > upon by both parties. > > short, and to the point. I'd really like to add something like, "To > this end, we hope that Sun will be more transparent in opening up > content editorship to trusted community members so that this > incident won't be repeated in the future.", but that's my personal > idea that should certainly be debated a bit at tomorrow's meeting. > > cheers, > steve
Reading all this serially as the mail trickled in :-) I suggest being more positive about the revert, and not attempting to control "Sun". I thought your earlier idea of requesting web access for some more people so incorrect changes can be reverted in future was a better idea. How about: "The OGB notes that changes made to the OpenSolaris.org home page did not comply with the agreements the OGB has made in the past with Sun's offical liaison when, on two previous occasions, changes were made without community consensus. We are very pleased these changes were reverted pending review by the Website group, but we request that the Website group take steps to ensure that a wider range of members have write access to the home page to ensure that future incidents (if they happen, which we hope will not be the case) are reverted faster." S. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/attachments/20090121/5fc1fd29/attachment.html>
