Sent from my mobile device (so please excuse typos) On 1 Jul 2011, at 18:13, Stefane Fermigier <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Jul 1, 2011, at 6:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > >> On 1 July 2011 13:54, Stefane Fermigier <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think your time spent arguing with false (cargo-cult) logic or bogus > information (see below - the various links you give to support your position > are bogus) is not only worthless, but counterproductive. As a mentor it is my job to e sure that the project learns best practice in the ASF. Two mentors have mad the same assertions. You can close not to accept out opinion, we are mentors. However you cannot refuse to listen and claim we are wasting time. I find this offensive and disrespectful. We have told you how and where you can escalate this if you think we are not accurately representing the view of the ASF as a whole. You have refused to do so, instead accusing us of wasting your time. Take it to the general list. If you are able to gather sufficient consensus for your position then you with find both Bertrand and I will back down. > >> To get there you need to adopt the successful model developed here at >> the ASF and engaged with by many companies that have a considerably >> higher investment in ASF projects than you do. The model works. It's >> not perfect and it sometimes evolves. If you ant to try and have this >> specific part of it evolve then take it to the wider community. > > Nope. That's not my job nor my priority. It's your job to make Stanbol a success. Here in the ASF that means more than writing code. It means making the project sustainable through our tried and tested development model. You have mentors to help guide you so that if you choose to focus only on code you can do so. > >> Why are you so much better than everyone else around here? (rhetorical >> question) > > Obviously I'm not since, as Bertrand stated, I'm only a PPMC (whatever that > means) and PPMCs are 2 steps down the food chain below board members. There is no food chain. Bertrands position on the board is irrelevant here in this community. He is a Stanbol committer and mentor only - one with a great deal of experience that is worth listening to, but a mentor and a committed only. > > >>>> It is standard practice across the ASF to *not* provide follow links. >>> >>> Standard by written nowhere, as far as I can tell (and Google). >> >> It's true that the ASF can be poor at formally documenting things, we >> tend to rely on precedent and experience, that's why we have mentors. >> To help guide you in the way to succeed as an ASF project. >> >> http://markmail.org/search/list:apache+link+nofollow >> >> http://markmail.org/search/list:incubator+link+nofollow > > These two searches don't link to anything that seem to have any authoritative > value (like a board decision). The board does not make decision for the projects. It helps guide them and handles foundation business, but it does not make decisions like this. > > >> I'm done arguing. I've stated my position as a mentor, as has >> Bertrand. A sensible proposal has been made that Bertrand has >> explicitly supported (and I implicitly support by not objecting to >> it). > > Which one? Putting nofollow on the links or not? There should be nofollow links. > > Since yours and Bertrand's position is to add rel=nofollow on the links, and > since I don't agree with this position, let's vote. Why not make some space for the community to express their opinion first. > Now, as a mentor, can you explain us again (or point to a document which > explains) how to conduct a vote ? You could start at http://community.apache.org/committers/index.html That gives a high level overview and links to other more detailed docs. > >> - if the majority of the community >> is happy with the proposal then this discussion is pointless. > > I'm assuming you're talking about the Stanbol community here. So +1. So please allow the community to speak before calling vote. That's not the best way to make decisions. See the links from the page above. > Ross
