Revising OpenWrt Rules

Wed Oct 14 20:37:29 EDT 2020

> -----Original Message-----
> From: openwrt-adm [mailto:openwrt-adm-bounces at lists.openwrt.org] On
> Behalf Of Fernando Frediani
> Sent: Donnerstag, 15. Oktober 2020 01:08
> To: openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org
> Subject: Re: Revising OpenWrt Rules
> 
> Hi
> 
> In my view the proposed text seems reasonably simple and easy to read and
> goes towards that what has been so far with minor adjustments that don't
> change the main points.
> Adrian - perhaps if you could point the main changes between the current
> and the proposed text and Rich can make further adjustments or
> simplifications where possible and find something that fits to the main
> propose of this review Rich is doing.

My main problem is that a lot of descriptive text is added that - in my opinion - is not necessary.

After all, the proposal reads more like a (explanatory) comment to a set of rules than a set of rules itself. (E.g. point 3 is actually not a rule at all, but just an explanation why the other rules are chosen like they are. In a law or constitution, stuff like that would be moved into a preamble.)

And where it actually adds a new precise detail (the vote deadline), my personal view is that this shouldn't be carved into stone, as it would make us inflexible. (I'd actually also drop point 7 entirely, as its first part is actually trivial).

So, my problem is a general one. I will try to have a look how we can resolve this situation (always speaking from my personal point of view, of course) during the next few days.

Let's see what the others think, I'm just a single opinion anyway.

Best

Adrian

> 
> Regards
> Fernando
> 
> On 14/10/2020 20:00, Adrian Schmutzler wrote:
> > Hi Rich,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: openwrt-adm [mailto:openwrt-adm-bounces at lists.openwrt.org]
> On
> >> Behalf Of Rich Brown
> >> Sent: Mittwoch, 14. Oktober 2020 20:37
> >> To: Richard E. Brown <richb.hanover at gmail.com>
> >> Cc: OpenWrt Project Administration <openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org>
> >> Subject: Re: Revising OpenWrt Rules
> >>
> >> I offer the following as a "Release Candidate 1" replacement for the
> >> original OpenWrt Rules at https://openwrt.org/rules. I believe they
> >> are a fair summary of the responses to my original notes.
> >>
> >> Much of this is a restatement of the original rules, retaining those
> >> procedures but making explicit the sense of trust between people that
> >> underlies the current rules.
> >>
> >> I did inject a change in establishing a 14-day period for formal
> >> votes on the OpenWrt-Admin list. There were two reasons: for agility
> >> - to prevent undecided issues from "hanging out there" indefinitely,
> >> and also to provide a basis for detecting when we should ask
> >> Decisionmakers whether they wish to participate further.
> >>
> >> As an RC1 document, further comments are welcome.
> >>
> >> Finally, thank you for all the deeply considered responses and for
> >> the delightfully respectful discussion. It makes me proud to be a
> >> member of the Project.
> > Thanks again for taking care of this important matter.
> >
> > I'm a fan of the current OpenWrt rules as they define everything necessary
> in a short but precise way.
> >
> > Unfortunately, I must say that I'm surprised by the amount of changes that
> are proposed here.
> > My understanding of the virtual meeting was that we discussed necessary
> changes about the role of the committers ("decision makers") and who
> would be eligible to become one.
> >
> > I'm fine with the term "decision makers", and my change would have been
> to simply replace the "committers" by "decision makers". The only sentence
> that needed to be altered content-wise would be the first rule, and "full
> commit rights" -> "full access" in rule 5. This would solve our problem, and
> mostly keep the simple, established rules in place.
> >
> > I'm sorry, but I didn't expect so much other things to be altered and added
> here, or I would have raised concerns earlier in the process.
> > Personally I'd rather keep it simple, and only change the few things
> necessary to address the problem.
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Adrian
> >
> >> Rich
> >>
> >> -----------
> >>
> >> OpenWrt Project Rules - RC1 14Oct2020
> >>
> >> 1. The OpenWrt Project (the "Project") is governed by a group of
> >> Decisionmakers who have demonstrated a long-standing commitment to
> >> OpenWrt through high quality contributions of code, documentation,
> >> organization, or leadership of the Project.
> >>
> >> 2. Decisionmakers affect the direction of the Project - product
> >> features, code, documentation, governance - by their personal
> >> efforts, by proposing changes to other Decisionmakers, and by
> >> approving contributions from others. The Project adopts proposals by
> >> a majority vote of all Decisionmakers.
> >>
> >> 3. OpenWrt's success hinges on the trust of character and judgement
> >> developed between Decisionmakers. Because of that trust, the Project
> >> can move forward without requiring every Decisionmaker to examine and
> >> agree to every decision.
> >>
> >> 4. A contributor to OpenWrt may become a Decisionmaker when it is
> >> obvious that they have a track record of high quality contributions
> >> (code, documentation, organizational suggestions, etc.) that enhance the
> project.
> >> After a nomination by a Decisionmaker and second by another, a simple
> >> majority vote is required to welcome a new Decisionmaker. The current
> >> list of Decisionmakers appears on this page. [Move the current list of
> "People"
> >> from the https://openwrt.org/about page]
> >>
> >> 5. To ensure that OpenWrt always has a quorum for votes,
> >> Decisionmakers are required to remain active in the project. We will
> >> develop a process whereby we can remind members of their obligations,
> >> and remove them from the list if they no longer wish to participate,
> >> or do not participate in votes for three months.
> >>
> >> 6. Decisionmakers owe an obligation of transparency to the members of
> >> the OpenWrt community. All decisions must be made public on the
> >> Project website. To the extent possible (exempting, for example,
> >> certain matters such as personnel and security issues), the decision
> >> making process should also be conducted in public.
> >>
> >> 7. Discussions of proposals may take place in any venue: the
> >> OpenWrt-Admin list, the OpenWrt-Devel list, the IRC channels, the
> >> OpenWrt Forum, and elsewhere. A formal call for a vote on the
> >> OpenWrt-Admin list will be held open for 14 days: Decisionmakers must
> >> respond (with approve, disapprove, abstain, or a request for more
> information) in that time frame.
> >>
> >> 8. Any Decisionmaker may request, and automatically be granted,
> >> permission to commit changes to code, the documentation, forum, etc.
> >> However, we rely on the judgement of all Decisionmakers to recognize
> >> their strengths and we expect they will only request the permissions
> >> necessary for their participation.
> >>
> >> 9. Any infrastructure should be FOSS, whether outsourced or operating
> >> on Project servers. Any service requires at least three people with
> >> full rights to administer it. Those administrators will be documented
> publicly.
> >>
> >> 10. The Project will not provide email accounts to individuals under
> >> its domain name.
> >>
> >> 11. Changes to these rules require a two-thirds majority vote of
> >> Decisionmakers.
> >>
> >> 12. All OpenWrt community members agree to be nice to each other.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> openwrt-adm mailing list
> >> openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org
> >> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-adm
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> openwrt-adm mailing list
> >> openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org
> >> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-adm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openwrt-adm mailing list
> openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org
> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-adm
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: openpgp-digital-signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-adm/attachments/20201015/5a5af14c/attachment.sig>