[LEDE-DEV] OpenWRT tree vs LEDE tree

[David Lang]

On Thu, 19 May 2016, John Crispin wrote:

> On 19/05/2016 15:34, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> writes:
>>> On 19/05/2016 14:48, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>>>> John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> writes:
>>>>> On 09/05/2016 09:44, David Lang wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think that will be possible because it's different people
>>>>>> working on each tree. I know the OpenWRT folks deleted the @openwrt
>>>>>> e-mail addresses for the people working on LEDE. I would assume that
>>>>>> they have blocked commit access for those people ase well, but I don't
>>>>>> know for sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> we are working on a solution to resolve this in the best possible manner
>>>>> for everyone involved. please be patient for a few more days.
>>>>
>>>> Any status update from the cabal?  Maybe it's time to remove the
>>>>
>>>>   "Establishing transparent decision processes with broad community
>>>>    participation and public meetings. "
>>>>
>>>> goal from the web site now? You can put it back later when you make it a
>>>> priority.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bjørn
>>>>
>>>
>>> we had various meetings all were public, people have been more active
>>> than before and all decision made so far have been active.
>>>
>>> was this just a drive by shooting or were you planning to achieve
>>> anything useful by this mail ?
>> 
>> Maybe just drive-by..
>> 
>> But I believe you should realize that for an outsider, the "we are
>> working on a solution" does not sound too good.  It is unclear who "we"
>> are, but it is very clear that it excludes the reader.  This is
>
> we means "the community" it is up to you to decide if you feel like part
> of the community or not. you are most certainly invited to be part just
> liek anyone doing constructive work.

<snip>

> * we agreed publicly via transparent voting in the last meeting that we
> will invite active package maintainers to participate in meetings and voting

Ok, it's not clear to me watching when 'we' would be the community of anyone 
commenting on this list vs the smaller 'we' that are the people invited to the 
meetings.

There are legitimate times for each definition, I'm not saying that all meetings 
should be open to the world.

But in any case, could the inner/maintainer team send a quick blurb to the list 
when a meeting has happened with some info on it? At least for meetings where 
policy decisions are made.

I can see good reasons not to publish too much detail about meetings between the 
two projects (if there are disagreements, it's too easy for the writeup to cause 
more grief for example)

David Lang