You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cxf.apache.org by Glen Mazza <gm...@talend.com> on 2011/02/28 22:26:56 UTC
Handling off-list emails
Agreed. The CXF PMC also held that Jeff's email simply didn't reach a
level warranting public airing, given the general view--in which I've
grown more in agreement with--that *no* email warrants such airing. Any
types of questionable emails are best sent to the internal
private@cxf.apache.org lists anyway for proper handling.
Further, I'd have to offer a huge caveat that my advice was
non-lawyerly, as you'd probably also have to look into libel and/or
invasion of privacy issues depending on the contents of the email
publicly disclosed. Such actions are rarely a good idea.
I apologize to Jeff for any grandstanding on my part over his email, as
well as the dev list airing of it, and most especially, any false
implication that bothersome emails are common from him. I hope he'll
forgive me for it.
Thanks Craig.
Glen
On 2/27/2011 9:21 AM, Craig Tataryn wrote:
> I'm still waiting to see one of the "abusive" emails you speak of Glen. So far you just kind of come off as a goof.
>
> And enough with the "inactive" jabs, Jeff's paid his dues. You don't question a Sensei's belt just because you weren't around when he was competing.
>
> Craig
>
Re: Handling off-list emails
Posted by Glen Mazza <gm...@talend.com>.
Thanks, appreciate it!
On 2/28/2011 4:40 PM, Jeff Genender wrote:
> Forgiven. Thanks for the apology.
>
> Jeff
>
>
> On Feb 28, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Glen Mazza wrote:
>
>> Agreed. The CXF PMC also held that Jeff's email simply didn't reach a level warranting public airing, given the general view--in which I've grown more in agreement with--that *no* email warrants such airing. Any types of questionable emails are best sent to the internal private@cxf.apache.org lists anyway for proper handling.
>>
>> Further, I'd have to offer a huge caveat that my advice was non-lawyerly, as you'd probably also have to look into libel and/or invasion of privacy issues depending on the contents of the email publicly disclosed. Such actions are rarely a good idea.
>>
>> I apologize to Jeff for any grandstanding on my part over his email, as well as the dev list airing of it, and most especially, any false implication that bothersome emails are common from him. I hope he'll forgive me for it.
>>
>> Thanks Craig.
>>
>> Glen
>>
>> On 2/27/2011 9:21 AM, Craig Tataryn wrote:
>>> I'm still waiting to see one of the "abusive" emails you speak of Glen. So far you just kind of come off as a goof.
>>>
>>> And enough with the "inactive" jabs, Jeff's paid his dues. You don't question a Sensei's belt just because you weren't around when he was competing.
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>
>>
--
Glen Mazza
Software Engineer, Talend (http://www.talend.com)
blog: http://www.jroller.com/gmazza
Re: Handling off-list emails
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@apache.org>.
Forgiven. Thanks for the apology.
Jeff
On Feb 28, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Glen Mazza wrote:
> Agreed. The CXF PMC also held that Jeff's email simply didn't reach a level warranting public airing, given the general view--in which I've grown more in agreement with--that *no* email warrants such airing. Any types of questionable emails are best sent to the internal private@cxf.apache.org lists anyway for proper handling.
>
> Further, I'd have to offer a huge caveat that my advice was non-lawyerly, as you'd probably also have to look into libel and/or invasion of privacy issues depending on the contents of the email publicly disclosed. Such actions are rarely a good idea.
>
> I apologize to Jeff for any grandstanding on my part over his email, as well as the dev list airing of it, and most especially, any false implication that bothersome emails are common from him. I hope he'll forgive me for it.
>
> Thanks Craig.
>
> Glen
>
> On 2/27/2011 9:21 AM, Craig Tataryn wrote:
>> I'm still waiting to see one of the "abusive" emails you speak of Glen. So far you just kind of come off as a goof.
>>
>> And enough with the "inactive" jabs, Jeff's paid his dues. You don't question a Sensei's belt just because you weren't around when he was competing.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>
>