[IAEP] [SLOBS] Governance.

[Tomeu Vizoso]

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 03:48, Donna Benjamin <donna at cc.com.au> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 19:54 +1800, David Farning wrote:
>> the thread in question wasn't ever *on* the list,
>
> As an innocent bystander... this is all a bit cloak and dagger.
>
> "The Thread" ?
>
> Afraid there's been too much reference to it, and not enough disclosure
> regarding what it's actually about.
>
> I would rather have not known it existed than to have it repeatedly
> referred to with no indication of what it's about, or whether I need to
> pay attention.
>
> FWIW - I appreciate that some issues do need to be hashed out amongst a
> few people in private, before seeking wider input, or review.

Nice to hear that. As will be seen when disclosed, the case was of
someone looking for more focused input before taking public action.

I'm a bit frustrated by all this noise because there's so much to be
done, and because I don't think that anyone here talks about Sugar
exclusively in public forums.

I happen to have little people around me with whom I can talk about
these issues, but what if other Sugar contributors lived in Prague and
we got together to have some beers some fridays? Wouldn't we share our
opinions on Sugar matters?

What are we going to do next weekend in Brussels when we meet for the
FOSDEM? Talk about football and share apple pie recipes?

Or is the problem only with email and in-person meetings wouldn't be
relevant here?

This is a problem in all open source projects and AFAIK there's no
known solution. And it gets much worst when a significant share of
contributors share an office like is the case of Mozilla, GNOME, OLPC,
etc

If someone feels marginalized because wasn't invited to take part in a
conversation between a few of members of this community, please state
so. But don't mud the waters with the transparency thing unless you
can point to a relevant issue on which action was taken without public
consultation.

> This has gone beyond that now, and begins to smell of conspiracy.
> Although I doubt there is anything sinister afoot, the time has come to
> reveal what this is all about.

+1 about publishing the whole thread.

Regards,

Tomeu