last monday i wrote two concrete proposals and stated that I want to
call for supporters for them according to our constitution.
I'm totally with you, that there are many more topics to resolve. But
we have to solve one after the oder. (Your words :-) )
So please admins, deliver a list, so that we can vote on the topics.
If you like to skip the 'call for supporters for a vote' phase, just
two of you must comply to vote on the topic. But nevertheless we need
a list of voters.
Am 29.01.2008 um 12:25 schrieb Pim Snel:
> Connie and everyone,
> I agree we must now improve the organization. There are obvious
> problems and its a good time to try to solve them now the emotions
> are tempered.
> About the Admins
> The current board of Admins are voted after and because of the the
> former crisis we had with Mr. Jung. I think everybody wanted a new
> situation where the project could not be hijacked by one person. The
> role of the new admins was primary protecting the project. I think
> its time now to enhance the role of the Adminstrators. If in fact
> Admins are chosen for 1 year, I think it's also good that an admin
> forms a short term innovation plan. Though this should be concerning
> the project structure and not about making technical decisions. If
> we implement a new Admin role, we must take time to discuss how we
> can protect the project against hijacking admins.
> Protecting the name eGroupWare.
> I also think its now really time we must create clear guidelines how
> the name eGoupWare may and may not be used. If we have these
> regulation complete, we must try to officially protect the name
> againt people of organizations who not resprect these regulations.
> If there are guidelines there can not be misunderstanding. Together
> we have made the name eGroupWare of worth so we must trust that
> eGroupWare is owned by the project.
> Personally I'm impressed by the way the TYPO3 project handles its
> branding: thay have a a style guide which tells everybody how the
> TYPO3 branding can and can not be used. I think this could also
> server the eGroupWare project. See http://typo3.org/teams/design/style-guide/
> About the voting and official member list
> I once made a plan to handle this including the specs of an egw-app
> to automate parts of this. t's a bit outdated but I think there are
> some good thoughts in it. Maybe you would like to read it. I placed
> it on our website: http://www.lingewoud.nl/index.php?id=337
> Op 28 jan 2008, om 14:35 heeft Cornelius Weiss het volgende
>> hi devs,
>> about 5 weeks ago, we quited the ugly scene about the tine 2.0
>> codebase. I think this is a good time to review what happend, as
>> it's near enough to know what happend, and far enough to have a
>> factually discussion.
>> Thinking about our project, and its constituions, for me the
>> outcome of the bizarre situation is, that we have to apply a few
>> patches to the project, to avoid having such situations again.
>> In my view, this are the most urgent topics:
>> 1. eGroupWare needs a clear voting schema.
>> While voting is a normal and important action for a democratic
>> project, in eGroupWare it only takes place in critical situations.
>> I'm convinced that we wouldn't have to face situation like last
>> month, if we had some minor technical votes in the normal egw
>> development cycle.
>> It's interesting to note, that there was no single vote since we
>> have released our consitution in March 2005.
>> Most pending is a list of members, which are allowed to vote. The
>> terminus 'active developers' is not helpful as it is to vague. The
>> absence of such a list, builds a high barrier as every vote
>> implies a discussion about who is allowed to vote and who not. This
>> kind of discussion always offends those, not allowed to vote.
>> I think we need clear rules, who is allowed to vote. Therefore we
>> need to change our consitution and adopt an updated version of our
>> new members howto! These new rules must make clear at any time, who
>> is allowed to vote without any additional discussions.
>> 2. eGroupWare needs frequent admin votes
>> In any democracy it's common to have votes from time to time.
>> Unfortunately not in eGroupWare. This leads to the current
>> situation of having two admins which are allmost not known to the
>> new developers. It was already stated on the core-list that this
>> situation is dangerous, as the only remaining active admin now has
>> a power position which was never intended by our constitution.
>> Currently we need to declare our distrust to the admins to have an
>> admin vote. Thus an admin vote is always offending and not a normal
>> action as it should be in a democracy. This leads to disastrous
>> situations like the one we had to face lastly.
>> I think we need frequent admin votes any 12 months. The admin
>> situation must reflect the project situation, and I think frequent
>> votes are the right tool for this.
>> I'll prepare suggestions for the points and ask for supporters
>> according to our constitution. As this needs a list of 'active
>> members' allowed to vote, I request the current admins to deliver
>> such a list.
>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
>> eGroupWare-core mailing list
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> eGroupWare-core mailing list