openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shane Curcuru <>
Subject Migrating forums: JFDI (was: Forums down: SQL Error: Too many connections [1040])
Date Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:46:24 GMT
On 10/17/2011 6:28 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 6:16 PM, MiguelAngel<>  wrote:
>> El 17/10/11 23:09, Rob Weir escribió:
>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>> <>  wrote:
>>>> Rob,
>>>> There was an update to the Forums Proposal based on some of the comments.
>>>> message about that is
>>>> <>:
>>>>    I mentioned
>>>>      1. Changing "sign the ICLA" to "become a committer" in part C.
>>>>      2. dropping "ASF" from part H.
>>>>    on the forum and got a couple of positive responses and no objections,
>>>>    so I made the change on the wiki.
>>> OK.  If there are no objections in the forum, and no objections
>>> expressed on the list, then why the hell are we voting?   IMHO, JFDI.
>>>   Welcome aboard, Forum Volunteers!
>>> -Rob
>> Hi Rob,
>> Forgive me, but my understanding of English is not very good, only a
>> forums volunteer.
>> Please could you explain in a more understandable words?.
>> I would like interpret right what you have writen.
>> Thanks in advance.
>> -Miguel Ángel.
> Sure.  In an Apache project, there are only a few situations were we
> require a vote.  One is to approve new committers or PMC members.
> Another is to approve a release.  For other decisions we operate by
> "lazy consensus".  This means that if there are no objections to a
> proposal, then the person who makes the proposal can go forward and
> implement it.  No vote is required.
> I'd prefer that we do not have an unnecessary vote when there is a
> clear consensus to go forward with the forums.  Having unnecessary
> votes might suggest that in the future other decisions might be
> deficient if they do not also have unnecessary votes.  I don't want to
> set that expectation.  I don't want us to make the decision making
> process in the project less efficient.

Personally, I wouldn't worry too much about the precedent of having 
unnecessary votes.  While Apache projects are encouraged to have clear 
rules for decision making (so it's easy for newcomers to understand), 
it's also expected that as a project evolves it's community, it may 
choose - through clear discussions - to change it's rules.  But I digress.

> JFDI mean "Just F***n'  Do It".  In other words, once it is clear that
> there are no objections, then stop talking about, just do it.  The
> idea is to eliminate needless discussion on the list.  There are many
> other things we need to discuss  and resolve.  We should take the
> proposals that we agree on off the list and start implementing them.

I think we need someone to actually lead this migration process.  I'd 
suggest that they indeed just start doing it - and keeping the list 
apprised of what they plan to do for each step.  A leader here doesn't 
necessarily have to be the person who copies the databases, but more 
someone to organize it and ensure it all gets done (and communicated, 
especially within the forums).

Note also that the proposal explicitly notes "Forum admins must become 
committers", and that [VOTE]s *are* always required to add any new 
committers to a project.  I'm not sure how many forum admins really need 
to be voted in, although we'd certainly welcome iCLAs (even without 
being a committer) from any of the forum organizers if they feel 
comfortable signing one.  And I think we can start the migration first, 
without worrying about committer bits unless there's a specific reason 
(especially with Andrew's note that the server is going away somewhat soon!)

> So thanks for submitting the proposal.  It was discussed and no one
> objected.  Congratulations.  Now the hard work begins....
> -Rob

- Shane

View raw message