Hi, On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> A little history is probably relevant here. Woman@ was set up on Aug 7 > 2005, during that time it has had very little activity with the most recent > email being Sept 14th 2007. > The fact is that people are not looking for a list called "women@". > Nevertheless the reasons that the list was originally created are still > valid. > > The community development project was created last year. In our original > resolution we had not proposed taking the women@ "activity". Instead we > are focussing on making it easier for people in general rather than on the > issues facing a specific group. The board requested that we take ownership > of the women@ work too. Since women@ has always been "just a list" it has > had no official role in the foundation. Bringing the activity into ComDev > provides a vehicle through which more action can be taken if there are > people willing and able to undertake such action. > > Rolling the women@ list into the d...@community.a.o list need not be a > permanent solution. If there is sufficient momentum behind the > wo...@objectives then we could, at some point in the future, create > wo...@community.apache.org - however, at this point in time there is no > need for such a list as demonstrated by the lack of activity on the existing > women@ list [2]. > Please note that the source data used above is incorrect, with the most recent email activity actually going a little way beyond Sept 14th 2007 [1], including an interesting post dated 3rd March 2009 [2] which links to some research work done on the "Effects of Gender Socialization on Females in the Open Source Community" [3] Hope this helps, A [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-women/ [2] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-women/200903.mbox/browser [3] http://short-stack.net/Paper.pdf
