Escalating review of [Bug 1342060] wasm: enable by default

[Douglas Crosher via governance]

Hi,

I would like to bring the following review decision to the attention of
the community and to ask how such matters can be escalated:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1342060

It is not just the decision that I dispute, I am not happy with the
process leading to this decision, and development has been ongoing for
around two years now and I first started contributing to the general
area of the work (asm.js at that time year before that).

I dispute that Mozilla Corp can demonstrate the merit of the decision. I
have raised the problems with the CEO Chris on two occasions, and
recently with the module owner without response. I believe there is
merit in the objections, and that I can demonstrate better performance
and a better plan. Where does that leave the Mozilla community and
governance based on merit? Do I just give up and not bother?

My impression of working on this project is that Mozilla Corp dictated
the decisions, and one reason given was that the critical issue was
getting agreement between the web browsers but this would seem to assume
that the Firefox community has no representation for the product.

I was not consulted before the creation of the WebAssembly CG, the group
many never have been given a choice on how the Chairs were appointed,
and in the end I am just ignored.

I could demonstrate better performance at the start of the process and
better performance now, and can articulate a development plan.

Regards
Douglas Crosher
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Escalating review of [Bug 1342060] wasm: enable by default

[Benjamin Kerensa via governance]

There is no escalation if the module owner and decision makers in the bug
have made a decision.

It appears you've exhausted your options.

On Feb 23, 2017 1:23 PM, "Douglas Crosher via governance" <
governance@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to bring the following review decision to the attention of
> the community and to ask how such matters can be escalated:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1342060
>
> It is not just the decision that I dispute, I am not happy with the
> process leading to this decision, and development has been ongoing for
> around two years now and I first started contributing to the general
> area of the work (asm.js at that time year before that).
>
> I dispute that Mozilla Corp can demonstrate the merit of the decision. I
> have raised the problems with the CEO Chris on two occasions, and
> recently with the module owner without response. I believe there is
> merit in the objections, and that I can demonstrate better performance
> and a better plan. Where does that leave the Mozilla community and
> governance based on merit? Do I just give up and not bother?
>
> My impression of working on this project is that Mozilla Corp dictated
> the decisions, and one reason given was that the critical issue was
> getting agreement between the web browsers but this would seem to assume
> that the Firefox community has no representation for the product.
>
> I was not consulted before the creation of the WebAssembly CG, the group
> many never have been given a choice on how the Chairs were appointed,
> and in the end I am just ignored.
>
> I could demonstrate better performance at the start of the process and
> better performance now, and can articulate a development plan.
>
> Regards
> Douglas Crosher
> ___
> governance mailing list
> governance@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
>
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Escalating review of [Bug 1342060] wasm: enable by default

[Douglas Crosher via governance]

Hi Benjamin,

Last time I looked I believe Brendan still had the final say, so I find
that hard to believe. I would like to hear that from the Mozilla Directors?

I would like to see some accommodation for the performance use cases,
and it does not seem a big thing to ask and something that would benefit
the web. This might require some new split in responsibilities so that
everyone can get along, and some more objective agreed metrics for 'merit'.

Regards
Douglas Crosher

On 02/24/2017 08:41 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> There is no escalation if the module owner and decision makers in the
> bug have made a decision.
> 
> It appears you've exhausted your options.
> 
> On Feb 23, 2017 1:23 PM, "Douglas Crosher via governance"
> mailto:governance@lists.mozilla.org>> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I would like to bring the following review decision to the attention of
> the community and to ask how such matters can be escalated:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1342060
> 
> 
> It is not just the decision that I dispute, I am not happy with the
> process leading to this decision, and development has been ongoing for
> around two years now and I first started contributing to the general
> area of the work (asm.js at that time year before that).
> 
> I dispute that Mozilla Corp can demonstrate the merit of the decision. I
> have raised the problems with the CEO Chris on two occasions, and
> recently with the module owner without response. I believe there is
> merit in the objections, and that I can demonstrate better performance
> and a better plan. Where does that leave the Mozilla community and
> governance based on merit? Do I just give up and not bother?
> 
> My impression of working on this project is that Mozilla Corp dictated
> the decisions, and one reason given was that the critical issue was
> getting agreement between the web browsers but this would seem to assume
> that the Firefox community has no representation for the product.
> 
> I was not consulted before the creation of the WebAssembly CG, the group
> many never have been given a choice on how the Chairs were appointed,
> and in the end I am just ignored.
> 
> I could demonstrate better performance at the start of the process and
> better performance now, and can articulate a development plan.
> 
> Regards
> Douglas Crosher
> ___
> governance mailing list
> governance@lists.mozilla.org 
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
> 
> 

___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Escalating review of [Bug 1342060] wasm: enable by default

[Benjamin Kerensa via governance]

That's not how things work and no Brendan hasnt been involved in the
project for years.

Mozilla's Board of Directors don't get involved in bugs and I can tell you
that your not going to get any escalation by emailing here.

Module owner has the final say and you've indicated you already went that
route so you exhausted all your options.




On Feb 23, 2017 2:30 PM, "Douglas Crosher"  wrote:

Hi Benjamin,

Last time I looked I believe Brendan still had the final say, so I find
that hard to believe. I would like to hear that from the Mozilla Directors?

I would like to see some accommodation for the performance use cases,
and it does not seem a big thing to ask and something that would benefit
the web. This might require some new split in responsibilities so that
everyone can get along, and some more objective agreed metrics for 'merit'.

Regards
Douglas Crosher

On 02/24/2017 08:41 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> There is no escalation if the module owner and decision makers in the
> bug have made a decision.
>
> It appears you've exhausted your options.
>
> On Feb 23, 2017 1:23 PM, "Douglas Crosher via governance"
> mailto:governance@lists.mozilla.org>>
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to bring the following review decision to the attention
of
> the community and to ask how such matters can be escalated:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1342060
> 
>
> It is not just the decision that I dispute, I am not happy with the
> process leading to this decision, and development has been ongoing for
> around two years now and I first started contributing to the general
> area of the work (asm.js at that time year before that).
>
> I dispute that Mozilla Corp can demonstrate the merit of the
decision. I
> have raised the problems with the CEO Chris on two occasions, and
> recently with the module owner without response. I believe there is
> merit in the objections, and that I can demonstrate better performance
> and a better plan. Where does that leave the Mozilla community and
> governance based on merit? Do I just give up and not bother?
>
> My impression of working on this project is that Mozilla Corp dictated
> the decisions, and one reason given was that the critical issue was
> getting agreement between the web browsers but this would seem to
assume
> that the Firefox community has no representation for the product.
>
> I was not consulted before the creation of the WebAssembly CG, the
group
> many never have been given a choice on how the Chairs were appointed,
> and in the end I am just ignored.
>
> I could demonstrate better performance at the start of the process and
> better performance now, and can articulate a development plan.
>
> Regards
> Douglas Crosher
> ___
> governance mailing list
> governance@lists.mozilla.org 
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
> 
>
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Escalating review of [Bug 1342060] wasm: enable by default

[Douglas Crosher via governance]

Hi Benjamin,

With all due respect I believe Brendan was still listed as having the
final say on technical disputes, and there are likely other paths too. I
see nothing to indicate that you have the authority to close down this
discussion. If no one in Mozilla wishes to engage then that is their
choice, I just won't bother here any more.

Regards
Douglas Crosher

On 02/24/2017 09:33 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> That's not how things work and no Brendan hasnt been involved in the
> project for years.
> 
> Mozilla's Board of Directors don't get involved in bugs and I can tell
> you that your not going to get any escalation by emailing here.
> 
> Module owner has the final say and you've indicated you already went
> that route so you exhausted all your options.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Feb 23, 2017 2:30 PM, "Douglas Crosher"  > wrote:
> 
> Hi Benjamin,
> 
> Last time I looked I believe Brendan still had the final say, so I find
> that hard to believe. I would like to hear that from the Mozilla
> Directors?
> 
> I would like to see some accommodation for the performance use cases,
> and it does not seem a big thing to ask and something that would benefit
> the web. This might require some new split in responsibilities so that
> everyone can get along, and some more objective agreed metrics for
> 'merit'.
> 
> Regards
> Douglas Crosher
> 
> On 02/24/2017 08:41 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> > There is no escalation if the module owner and decision makers in the
> > bug have made a decision.
> >
> > It appears you've exhausted your options.
> >
> > On Feb 23, 2017 1:23 PM, "Douglas Crosher via governance"
> >  
>  >> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to bring the following review decision to the
> attention of
> > the community and to ask how such matters can be escalated:
> > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1342060
> 
> >  >
> >
> > It is not just the decision that I dispute, I am not happy
> with the
> > process leading to this decision, and development has been
> ongoing for
> > around two years now and I first started contributing to the
> general
> > area of the work (asm.js at that time year before that).
> >
> > I dispute that Mozilla Corp can demonstrate the merit of the
> decision. I
> > have raised the problems with the CEO Chris on two occasions, and
> > recently with the module owner without response. I believe
> there is
> > merit in the objections, and that I can demonstrate better
> performance
> > and a better plan. Where does that leave the Mozilla community and
> > governance based on merit? Do I just give up and not bother?
> >
> > My impression of working on this project is that Mozilla Corp
> dictated
> > the decisions, and one reason given was that the critical
> issue was
> > getting agreement between the web browsers but this would seem
> to assume
> > that the Firefox community has no representation for the product.
> >
> > I was not consulted before the creation of the WebAssembly CG,
> the group
> > many never have been given a choice on how the Chairs were
> appointed,
> > and in the end I am just ignored.
> >
> > I could demonstrate better performance at the start of the
> process and
> > better performance now, and can articulate a development plan.
> >
> > Regards
> > Douglas Crosher
> > ___
> > governance mailing list
> > governance@lists.mozilla.org
> 
>  >
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
> 
> >  >
> >
> 
> 

___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Escalating review of [Bug 1342060] wasm: enable by default

[Benjamin Kerensa via governance]

That module wiki is outdated Brendan is not involved in the project. I'm
not shutting down this discussion I'm just letting you know you have
exhausted your options.

I've been around long enough to see many emails like yours and see them go
nowhere.

If you haven't got a positive response from the module owner or Chris I
don't think anyone is going to intervene on your behalf.




On Feb 23, 2017 2:42 PM, "Douglas Crosher"  wrote:

Hi Benjamin,

With all due respect I believe Brendan was still listed as having the
final say on technical disputes, and there are likely other paths too. I
see nothing to indicate that you have the authority to close down this
discussion. If no one in Mozilla wishes to engage then that is their
choice, I just won't bother here any more.

Regards
Douglas Crosher

On 02/24/2017 09:33 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> That's not how things work and no Brendan hasnt been involved in the
> project for years.
>
> Mozilla's Board of Directors don't get involved in bugs and I can tell
> you that your not going to get any escalation by emailing here.
>
> Module owner has the final say and you've indicated you already went
> that route so you exhausted all your options.
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 23, 2017 2:30 PM, "Douglas Crosher"  > wrote:
>
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> Last time I looked I believe Brendan still had the final say, so I
find
> that hard to believe. I would like to hear that from the Mozilla
> Directors?
>
> I would like to see some accommodation for the performance use cases,
> and it does not seem a big thing to ask and something that would
benefit
> the web. This might require some new split in responsibilities so that
> everyone can get along, and some more objective agreed metrics for
> 'merit'.
>
> Regards
> Douglas Crosher
>
> On 02/24/2017 08:41 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> > There is no escalation if the module owner and decision makers in
the
> > bug have made a decision.
> >
> > It appears you've exhausted your options.
> >
> > On Feb 23, 2017 1:23 PM, "Douglas Crosher via governance"
> >  
>  >> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to bring the following review decision to the
> attention of
> > the community and to ask how such matters can be escalated:
> > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1342060
> 
> >  >
> >
> > It is not just the decision that I dispute, I am not happy
> with the
> > process leading to this decision, and development has been
> ongoing for
> > around two years now and I first started contributing to the
> general
> > area of the work (asm.js at that time year before that).
> >
> > I dispute that Mozilla Corp can demonstrate the merit of the
> decision. I
> > have raised the problems with the CEO Chris on two occasions,
and
> > recently with the module owner without response. I believe
> there is
> > merit in the objections, and that I can demonstrate better
> performance
> > and a better plan. Where does that leave the Mozilla community
and
> > governance based on merit? Do I just give up and not bother?
> >
> > My impression of working on this project is that Mozilla Corp
> dictated
> > the decisions, and one reason given was that the critical
> issue was
> > getting agreement between the web browsers but this would seem
> to assume
> > that the Firefox community has no representation for the
product.
> >
> > I was not consulted before the creation of the WebAssembly CG,
> the group
> > many never have been given a choice on how the Chairs were
> appointed,
> > and in the end I am just ignored.
> >
> > I could demonstrate better performance at the start of the
> process and
> > better performance now, and can articulate a development plan.
> >
> > Regards
> > Douglas Crosher
> > ___
> > governance mailing list
> > governance@lists.mozilla.org
> 
>  >
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
> 
> >  >
> >
>
>
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozill

Re: Escalating review of [Bug 1342060] wasm: enable by default

[Douglas Crosher via governance]

Hi Benjamin,

Thank you for the clarification, perhaps I was mislead by the 'outdated'
wiki, and on how this 'community' works or doesn't. If I have done all I
can here then so be it.

Regards
Douglas Crosher

On 02/24/2017 09:49 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> That module wiki is outdated Brendan is not involved in the project. I'm
> not shutting down this discussion I'm just letting you know you have
> exhausted your options.
> 
> I've been around long enough to see many emails like yours and see them
> go nowhere.
> 
> If you haven't got a positive response from the module owner or Chris I
> don't think anyone is going to intervene on your behalf.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Feb 23, 2017 2:42 PM, "Douglas Crosher"  > wrote:
> 
> Hi Benjamin,
> 
> With all due respect I believe Brendan was still listed as having the
> final say on technical disputes, and there are likely other paths too. I
> see nothing to indicate that you have the authority to close down this
> discussion. If no one in Mozilla wishes to engage then that is their
> choice, I just won't bother here any more.
> 
> Regards
> Douglas Crosher
> 
> On 02/24/2017 09:33 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> > That's not how things work and no Brendan hasnt been involved in the
> > project for years.
> >
> > Mozilla's Board of Directors don't get involved in bugs and I can tell
> > you that your not going to get any escalation by emailing here.
> >
> > Module owner has the final say and you've indicated you already went
> > that route so you exhausted all your options.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Feb 23, 2017 2:30 PM, "Douglas Crosher"  
> > >> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Benjamin,
> >
> > Last time I looked I believe Brendan still had the final say,
> so I find
> > that hard to believe. I would like to hear that from the Mozilla
> > Directors?
> >
> > I would like to see some accommodation for the performance use
> cases,
> > and it does not seem a big thing to ask and something that
> would benefit
> > the web. This might require some new split in responsibilities
> so that
> > everyone can get along, and some more objective agreed metrics for
> > 'merit'.
> >
> > Regards
> > Douglas Crosher
> >
> > On 02/24/2017 08:41 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> > > There is no escalation if the module owner and decision
> makers in the
> > > bug have made a decision.
> > >
> > > It appears you've exhausted your options.
> > >
> > > On Feb 23, 2017 1:23 PM, "Douglas Crosher via governance"
> > >  
> >  >
> >  
> >   > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I would like to bring the following review decision to the
> > attention of
> > > the community and to ask how such matters can be escalated:
> > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1342060
> 
> >  >
> > >  
> >  >>
> > >
> > > It is not just the decision that I dispute, I am not happy
> > with the
> > > process leading to this decision, and development has been
> > ongoing for
> > > around two years now and I first started contributing to the
> > general
> > > area of the work (asm.js at that time year before that).
> > >
> > > I dispute that Mozilla Corp can demonstrate the merit of the
> > decision. I
> > > have raised the problems with the CEO Chris on two
> occasions, and
> > > recently with the module owner without response. I believe
> > there is
> > > merit in the objections, and that I can demonstrate better
> > performance
> > > and a better plan. Where does that leave the Mozilla
> community and
> > > governance based on merit? Do I just give up and not bother?
> > >
> > > My impression of working on this project is that Mozilla
>

Re: Escalating review of [Bug 1342060] wasm: enable by default

[Douglas Crosher via governance]

Hi Benjamin,

Could I also ask if this wiki page is also out outdated:
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/

"Mozilla is an open source project governed as a meritocracy. Our
community is structured as a virtual organization where authority is
distributed to both volunteer and employed community members as they
show their abilities through contributions to the project."

If this is still the principle then it should be possible for members of
the community to challenge Mozilla Corp on the basis of 'meritocracy',
and I believe I can demonstrate better performance than Mozilla Corp on
a component directed at performance and have been able to do so for two
years.

If this is still the principle then perhaps Mozilla Corp should not have
been shutting out members of the community and working with the
assumption that only they represent Firefox in standards development?

What happens when Mozilla Corp can not claim module ownership and peer
status under the principle of meritocracy? Are these the principles of
Mozilla or Mozilla Corp?

Perhaps the wiki is outdated and if so then can it be updated so that
the community knows where it stands.

Regards
Douglas Crosher


On 02/24/2017 10:20 AM, Douglas Crosher via governance wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
> 
> Thank you for the clarification, perhaps I was mislead by the 'outdated'
> wiki, and on how this 'community' works or doesn't. If I have done all I
> can here then so be it.
> 
> Regards
> Douglas Crosher
> 
> On 02/24/2017 09:49 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
>> That module wiki is outdated Brendan is not involved in the project. I'm
>> not shutting down this discussion I'm just letting you know you have
>> exhausted your options.
>>
>> I've been around long enough to see many emails like yours and see them
>> go nowhere.
>>
>> If you haven't got a positive response from the module owner or Chris I
>> don't think anyone is going to intervene on your behalf.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 23, 2017 2:42 PM, "Douglas Crosher" > > wrote:
>>
>> Hi Benjamin,
>>
>> With all due respect I believe Brendan was still listed as having the
>> final say on technical disputes, and there are likely other paths too. I
>> see nothing to indicate that you have the authority to close down this
>> discussion. If no one in Mozilla wishes to engage then that is their
>> choice, I just won't bother here any more.
>>
>> Regards
>> Douglas Crosher
>>
>> On 02/24/2017 09:33 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
>> > That's not how things work and no Brendan hasnt been involved in the
>> > project for years.
>> >
>> > Mozilla's Board of Directors don't get involved in bugs and I can tell
>> > you that your not going to get any escalation by emailing here.
>> >
>> > Module owner has the final say and you've indicated you already went
>> > that route so you exhausted all your options.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Feb 23, 2017 2:30 PM, "Douglas Crosher" > 
>> > >> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Benjamin,
>> >
>> > Last time I looked I believe Brendan still had the final say,
>> so I find
>> > that hard to believe. I would like to hear that from the Mozilla
>> > Directors?
>> >
>> > I would like to see some accommodation for the performance use
>> cases,
>> > and it does not seem a big thing to ask and something that
>> would benefit
>> > the web. This might require some new split in responsibilities
>> so that
>> > everyone can get along, and some more objective agreed metrics for
>> > 'merit'.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Douglas Crosher
>> >
>> > On 02/24/2017 08:41 AM, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
>> > > There is no escalation if the module owner and decision
>> makers in the
>> > > bug have made a decision.
>> > >
>> > > It appears you've exhausted your options.
>> > >
>> > > On Feb 23, 2017 1:23 PM, "Douglas Crosher via governance"
>> > > > 
>> > > >
>> > > 
>> > > > > >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I would like to bring the following review decision to the
>> > attention of
>> > > the community and to ask how such matters can be escalated:
>> > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1342060
>> 
>> > >