Out of self-reflection, one should consider how much of this thread itself emphasizes the antithesis of the OP... Just a thought!
Niclas On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> > wrote: > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Shane Curcuru <a...@shanecurcuru.org> > wrote: > > >> I would prefer for President, EVP, directors to agree on a single email > >> alias that is an unarchived alias, with a published list of the specific > >> ASF Officers or Members that it goes to directly (names to be approved > >> by President). > > > > That is exactly my preference as well. > > > > Marvin, at this point what I'm about to ask of you is grossly unfair > (since > > your proposal, apparently doesn't really make anything worse) but would > > you consider the above statement by Shane to be your course of action? > > Sure. There are several approaches which I'd be fine with. Shane's > approach above seems sound. > > Elsethread I see a preference stated for an officer of the ASF on the > alias. I don't think that's necessary, so long as we have the > President's designates. I'm anticipating that it will be the > individuals who have already stepped forward on members@apache, though > they have not yet explicitly granted permission to have their names > published. > > I'll work up a new patch tomorrow when I'm a little more awake. > > Marvin Humphrey > -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
