openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List Activity through July
Date Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:45:19 GMT
We could reduce private traffic if we discussed the policy for trademarks in public. The community
can help write a clear policy statement with real and fictional examples. This would serve
the community by reducing private inquiries to unusual cases not previously considered or
unclearly explained.


Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 29, 2015, at 12:19 PM, Andrea Pescetti <> wrote:
> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> Separating out [VOTE] and maybe even [DISCUSS] threads related to
>> [VOTE]s and/or lazy consensus should be possible.  I will look into
>> that as a refinement in future reports.
> I would save you some hours and rely on easy indicators and on a clear goal: full transparency
(let me say, once again, that private traffic does not contain any important discussions or
decisions, but still I appreciate that we commit to showing it).
> So, from my mailbox data (and they might be slightly imprecise but we do not want absolute
precision here): the private list accounts for 20% of the traffic of English OpenOffice lists
in the period considered (1 January to 31 July 2015). I obviously excluded the issues@ and
commits@ list, and I excluded all native-language lists.
> 20% is high. OK, we had three Chair elections so far in 2015, PMC additions and several
committer invitations; and the press and trademark inquiries are numerous. But still 20% is
> Thank you Dennis for the numbers, and now the focus should be on how we can improve them
and explain them.
> Improve: we can aim at reducing that number to be below 20%, and to keep your other absolute
numbers under control too (while other indicators, such as the thread length, do not add value
and add work, and are not meaningful to me at least).
> Explain: I would appreciate to see a paragraph in the quarterly report about how (not
numbers: topics) the private list was used in the previous reporting period (so: October 2015
Report contains a report about private activity in April-May-June). Five lines, saying what
was discussed there, without revealing any specific details; and saying whether action was
taken to move interesting conversations to the dev list (which happens quite often). I suspect
that this is more interesting, to the community and the Board, than having better numbers
without context.
> Regards,
>  Andrea.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message