Hi All. We have now reached the end of the lazy consensus period.
There has been no -1, a couple of comments and a couple of +1, this means the proposal is accepted. However, I have to admit, I think we have a big problem. If I go ahead with the proposal (as lazy consensus suggest), and follow the idea from Andrea. I would have to remove a large part of the vm team. Only andrea has reacted at all (with a +1), and according to the idea from andrea we should revoke the others karma. Can it really be true, that the current vm team dont want to take if I take lead ? In that case it would be highly wrong of me to use the lazy consensus. I can understand a lot of subscribers to this list, dont care (as long as the services are available), but given the previous debate (and the focus on forcing me to forward a new proposal), I would have expected the PMC group to voice their opinion, and also the current vm team. We cannot just overrule the current sysadm, that does not feel fair !! Any thoughts ? rgds jan I. On 29 December 2013 16:09, jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote: > top posting. > > A friendly reminder, this LAZY Consensus proposal runs until january 2nd. > > Until now, no -1 has been received. > > Andrea is the only team member that has given a +1 > > the other team members (jsc, imacat, arist) have not expressed any opinion > yet. > > Wish you all a happy new year. > rgds > jan I. > > > > On 28 December 2013 17:39, Andrew Pitonyak <and...@pitonyak.org> wrote: > >> I have been following as best I can while traveling, and it is not my >> place to say, but I agree.... >> >> jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> >On 28 December 2013 16:19, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> >> On 22/12/2013 jan i wrote: >> >> >> >>> based on a polite push from a good infra colleague, I have decided to >> >>> present yet another proposal for maintaining ooo-wiki2-vm.a.o and >> >>> ooo-forums.a.o >> >>> >> >> >> >> I agree with the proposal, so +1 from me. >> >> >> >> The main value it brings is that we will have a common (and >> lightweight) >> >> set of rules that allow us to establish some initial guidelines. This >> will >> >> make it easier to include new volunteers later, or promote existing >> >> volunteers to sysadmin role, or do whatever we agree upon, at due >> time. But >> >> we need an initial set of guidelines to work effectively as a team. >> > >> > >> >thanks for your +1, thats the first of the existing team, I still hope >> the >> >rest of the team will join. The intention of the proposal is NOT to >> exclude >> >anybody, it (as andrea write very nicely) to make a basis on which we can >> >build, while securing our servers. >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> I suggest myself for sysadm, and jsc, pescetti, arist and imacat for >> >>> vm-team. Of course my suggestion depends on the willingness of the >> >>> mentioned people. >> >>> >> >> >> >> I'm willing to be part of team as proposed. >> > >> >thx, your input and help is much valued. >> > >> >Remember there are 3 days left of this year, if you have something to >> catch >> >up on. >> > >> >rgds >> >jan I. >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Andrea. >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> >> >> >> >> > >
