On Feb 19, 2015, at 2:09 PM, Rob Weir wrote: > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: >> Rob Weir wrote: >>> >>> Thread for discussion >> >> >> Come on, what's this? Do you guys read this list? We had this conversation >> earlier this month, not ages ago. It ended like this: >> >> http://markmail.org/message/2ae5vrtevxyizaje >> > > Unfortunately we have a party who wants to steamroll through a fast > delete unless I immediately show "proof" of consensus for another > option. From what I've been able to ascertain a vote is the only > acceptable proof. Personally, I'd be happy to look at your eventual > version. I think many others would as well. The vote does not > really change that.
Just saying. There are two ways to look at who is steamrolling. When the ASF is saying that there is a problem then it needs to be considered. You are providing a vote that proves we want "Change" - the range of this is large and ill defined. Your choices are missing options like: [ ] Convert to a positive statement about the AL2.0 plus provide some links on license compliance. Link to third parties. [ ] Make the minimal changes to satisfy the Foundation. Originally I was about preserving and converting the openoffice.org site and then doing minimal changes. Once I may have support this page. Now I feel that there are issues that reflect poorly on the Foundation. Regards, Dave > > Regards, > > -Rob > >> [Andrea] The page provides relevant information in a bad way. It is by >> keeping it as it is that we play the game of haters. I'll propose a rewrite >> next weekend. >> >> Now, weekends do not last 5 days, unfortunately, and life on the OpenOffice >> lists has been more eventful than I expected. But I very much prefer that >> instead of flooding the list as a handful of people did in the last few >> hours, someone would remember this and either say that we were still waiting >> for my rewrite or that they were replacing me in the task since I'm clearly >> late. But voting on the abstract option of replacing the page which >> something that doesn't exist does not really make a lot of sense to me. >> >> And it sounds too much like the usual "we talk about something expecting >> that someone else does the work" that I'd like we abandon. >> >> Well, my offer to rewrite it remains valid... but you'll have to be patient >> until next weekend! >> >> Regards, >> Andrea. >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
