Re: [dev] charter discussion ?
Le 11 sept. 08 à 18:52, Christian Lohmaier a écrit : Hi *, On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Martin Hollmichel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] regarding the new draft of the charter (http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Items/Charter_Proposal ) there is a paragraph 4.1.1 Three Code Contributor Representatives [...] From my perspective with active code contributor a people described, who constantly contribute code to the project under the general rules of the project, [including SCA, cws-process] Is this something we can agree on as being an active code contributor for OpenOffice.org ? +1 from my part +1 from my side. I would however appreciate a discussion on my proposal on the eligibility of Category leads and more NLC representatives (in the Talk section of the charter proposal). Best, Charles. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] charter discussion ?
Le 16 sept. 08 à 17:13, Andre Schnabel a écrit : Hi, Original-Nachricht Von: Charles-H. Schulz [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's some progress, but again, where do Category leads fit? Product Development Representative? Can you confirm something about it? sorry, I obviously neet to prepare an entry page so that we can easily find all information. As said - all project memebers (including category leads) are eligible. The difference is in the electorate or constituency. Category leads are mentioned for the electorates: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Items/Election_Process_Proposal#Council_Constituencies Ah, I had never seen that page. So do you (and others ) confirm that according to this council draft that the Category leads of the Incubator project can be elected as a product development representative and the Category leads of the NLC as a NL representative? . Then we have a basis for discussion. I am not exactly satisfied with the numbers of NLC represenatives as I wrote earlier, but I'll start the conversation on this on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, I don't really agree with that but if in general the NLC does not see anything wrong with this I won't object... Do you think we could perhaps discuss this on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes, please. But please try to focus on this special topic. It is very hard to follow the discussion on 4 or more lists. Sure. I'll keep it on focus. best, Charles. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] charter discussion ?
Hi, Charles-H. Schulz schrieb: As said - all project memebers (including category leads) are eligible. The difference is in the electorate or constituency. Category leads are mentioned for the electorates: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Items/Election_Process_Proposal#Council_Constituencies Ah, I had never seen that page. So do you (and others ) confirm that according to this council draft that the Category leads of the Incubator project can be elected as a product development representative and the Category leads of the NLC as a NL representative? . The NLC Category lead might even be elected as CCR or Code Contributor Representative. Any project member can candidate for any (but the Sun) seat. Obviously it would be better to candidate for a seat, if the electorate knows you and can confirm that you will be able to act in the name of this specific group. André - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] charter discussion ?
Hi Martin, On Thursday, 2008-09-11 18:03:40 +0200, Martin Hollmichel wrote: From my perspective with active code contributor a people described, who constantly contribute code to the project under the general rules of the project, [...] Personally I would also expect that such described contributor also constantly takes over ownership of child workspaces. Seconded, at least for being a R (Community Council Code Contributor Representative ;-) Is this something we can agree on as being an active code contributor for OpenOffice.org ? Yes, +1 Eike -- OOo/SO Calc core developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. SunSign 0x87F8D412 : 2F58 5236 DB02 F335 8304 7D6C 65C9 F9B5 87F8 D412 OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Please don't send personal mail to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] account, which I use for mailing lists only and don't read from outside Sun. Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks. pgpuPYePGBNbA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] charter discussion ?
Hi, I know that this does not address the concerns regarding the discussion who's electable for the council but I also think that this is not the main point to get the CC to get the work done. From my experience from the last years in the CC I just can say that I'm not able to follow _and_ to work on all the stuff we had on the agenda, what I would like to do is either to judge and vote about well prepared proposals or to work in just one area for the CC. And having the proposals is the harder work to do. But sceptic as I am, I don't think that we'll find people for the all above proposed Offices. And I just don't think that the proposed changes alone in the charter for making more people electable for the CC makes the work in CC better. regarding the new draft of the charter (http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Items/Charter_Proposal) there is a paragraph 4.1.1 Three “Code Contributor Representatives” Three persons who represent the developers who actively contribute source code t the OpenOffce.org code repository. They communicate concerns and proposals of individual as well as corporate code developers. Typically they should be members of the core projects of OpenOffice.org. From my perspective with active code contributor a people described, who constantly contribute code to the project under the general rules of the project, meaning, being a doamin developer having commit access to the code, contributing code with the established child workspace processes and under the accepted term and conditions of the project (SCA, formerly known as JCA).Personally I would also expect that such described contributor also constantly takes over ownership of child workspaces. Is this something we can agree on as being an active code contributor for OpenOffice.org ? Martin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] charter discussion ?
Hi *, On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Martin Hollmichel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] regarding the new draft of the charter (http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Items/Charter_Proposal) there is a paragraph 4.1.1 Three Code Contributor Representatives [...] From my perspective with active code contributor a people described, who constantly contribute code to the project under the general rules of the project, [including SCA, cws-process] Is this something we can agree on as being an active code contributor for OpenOffice.org ? +1 from my part ciao Christian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] charter discussion ?
Hi, From my perspective with active code contributor a people described, who constantly contribute code to the project under the general rules of the project, [including SCA, cws-process] Is this something we can agree on as being an active code contributor for OpenOffice.org ? +1 Best regards Max - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] charter discussion ?
sorry, for stepping in that lately. by looking at the current charter there are mainly two areas of work described for the Community Council: * legislative tasks like representation of the community, coordination with various entities, voting, doing proposals * judiciary tasks like arbitrate between different parties inside and outside the community. IHMO one big part is missing, the executive part and if I review the work of the CC this is the main issue within the CC: Doing the actual work, e.g. doing the new elections, make a proposal for something (budget, year plan, policies, etc.) is not making that progress we would like to see. The voluntary approach that the members of the CC are also doing the actual work does simply not work. Typically the current CC members have a lot of other jobs/work so I think most of them are already looking for what they can do less instead of taking over more responsibilities and work. I would propose to delegate the actual work to officers which are preparing proposal and let the CC make the final decisions. In that way we can establish subject matter experts which are willing and able to do the actual work and make the CC at the same time more effective. What I can think of that we establish at least following officers: * Exec Officer: preparing meetings, minutes, elections and other administrative stuff * a Secretary: minutes, invitations, etc. * Treasurer * Conference planning officer: planning and coordinating various conferences * Infrastructure Officer: * Engineering/Development Officer: * Localization and Internationalization Officer: * Legal Officer: legal issues, e.g. trademark policies etc. * public relations officer: other Offices (ODF, can be added as needed These Officers can be elected out of the community based on the principles of meritocracy. Officers then would have the right to speak in the CC. The Officers also would be the owner of the according budget.Officers can build working groups. I know that this does not address the concerns regarding the discussion who's electable for the council but I also think that this is not the main point to get the CC to get the work done. From my experience from the last years in the CC I just can say that I'm not able to follow _and_ to work on all the stuff we had on the agenda, what I would like to do is either to judge and vote about well prepared proposals or to work in just one area for the CC. And having the proposals is the harder work to do. But sceptic as I am, I don't think that we'll find people for the all above proposed Offices. And I just don't think that the proposed changes alone in the charter for making more people electable for the CC makes the work in CC better. Martin Michael Meeks wrote: Hi Martin, I notice, at: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council_Minutes#Minutes there is a section: [snip] Work on modification of the CC charter The draft for the proposal is now on the wiki. Martin will bring the discussion on the charter to the dev@ list in order to get more feedback from developers (core and non core developers) about the interest of that group to get involved in issues not related to source code. AI: Martin to bring the discussion on dev@ [snip] The draft proposal is here: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Items/Charter_Proposal is there already a thread discussing this ? Thanks, Michael. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] charter discussion ?
Hello Martin, What you are saying makes sense. You should perhaps add it to the Talk section of the Charter draft: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Council/Items/Charter_Proposal Best, Charles. Le 10 sept. 08 à 13:03, Martin Hollmichel a écrit : sorry, for stepping in that lately. by looking at the current charter there are mainly two areas of work described for the Community Council: * legislative tasks like representation of the community, coordination with various entities, voting, doing proposals * judiciary tasks like arbitrate between different parties inside and outside the community. IHMO one big part is missing, the executive part and if I review the work of the CC this is the main issue within the CC: Doing the actual work, e.g. doing the new elections, make a proposal for something (budget, year plan, policies, etc.) is not making that progress we would like to see. The voluntary approach that the members of the CC are also doing the actual work does simply not work. Typically the current CC members have a lot of other jobs/work so I think most of them are already looking for what they can do less instead of taking over more responsibilities and work. I would propose to delegate the actual work to officers which are preparing proposal and let the CC make the final decisions. In that way we can establish subject matter experts which are willing and able to do the actual work and make the CC at the same time more effective. What I can think of that we establish at least following officers: * Exec Officer: preparing meetings, minutes, elections and other administrative stuff * a Secretary: minutes, invitations, etc. * Treasurer * Conference planning officer: planning and coordinating various conferences * Infrastructure Officer: * Engineering/Development Officer: * Localization and Internationalization Officer: * Legal Officer: legal issues, e.g. trademark policies etc. * public relations officer: other Offices (ODF, can be added as needed These Officers can be elected out of the community based on the principles of meritocracy. Officers then would have the right to speak in the CC. The Officers also would be the owner of the according budget.Officers can build working groups. I know that this does not address the concerns regarding the discussion who's electable for the council but I also think that this is not the main point to get the CC to get the work done. From my experience from the last years in the CC I just can say that I'm not able to follow _and_ to work on all the stuff we had on the agenda, what I would like to do is either to judge and vote about well prepared proposals or to work in just one area for the CC. And having the proposals is the harder work to do. But sceptic as I am, I don't think that we'll find people for the all above proposed Offices. And I just don't think that the proposed changes alone in the charter for making more people electable for the CC makes the work in CC better. Martin Michael Meeks wrote: Hi Martin, I notice, at: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council_Minutes#Minutes there is a section: [snip] Work on modification of the CC charter The draft for the proposal is now on the wiki. Martin will bring the discussion on the charter to the dev@ list in order to get more feedback from developers (core and non core developers) about the interest of that group to get involved in issues not related to source code. AI: Martin to bring the discussion on dev@ [snip] The draft proposal is here: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Items/Charter_Proposal is there already a thread discussing this ? Thanks, Michael. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] Re:[dev] Re:[dev] charter discussion ?
Hi, I posted my comments and proposals on the Discussion page of the proposal. Best, Charles. Créez votre adresse électronique [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1 Go d'espace de stockage, anti-spam et anti-virus intégrés.
