From apachecongerald07@example.org  Wed Jun  1 15:28:33 2011
Return-Path: <apachecongerald07@example.org>
X-Original-To: gerald07@example.org
Delivered-To: gerald07@example.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [83.161.120.155])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5E4A26325
	for <gerald07@example.org>; Wed,  1 Jun 2011 15:28:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 42582 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 15:28:33 -0000
Delivered-To: gerald07@example.org
Received: (qmail 42555 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 15:28:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gerald07@example.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Post: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Id: <apachecon-discuss.apache.org>
Reply-To: gerald07@example.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gerald07@example.org
Received: (qmail 42546 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jun 2011 15:28:33 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 15:28:33 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10
	tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of gerald07@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender)
Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-qy0-f171.google.com) (83.161.120.155)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 15:28:27 +0000
Received: by qyj19 with SMTP id 19so2260989qyj.2
        for <gerald07@example.org>; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 08:28:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=+HfBrjkhklFhPICXdn9CjhctAiQfIvwk4YA+NXlqa58=;
        b=LeZq/jzhBibdhmEtQ6VOETupwK7VK3yk7GeQ4rMLL9rJ1IW2Tc4aFm/CvsA7czVFJS
         CtG3ISI9a9G4A3vETmwwu+5vpqSJIe4Qhd3vRzNDYUpSCJhewoPpV090mdfevvzie5+u
         +MNMh38mCykgpN+zd6risfwp4BiWnGeDoQHio=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=w/xjjE4P9qBsuAhffpcTebhh/dCbtdZ8nXifRjyLxijukFwlr5choU7Rgp5/XL6fWr
         +b9nNUXZ0Le/IpoAsVbF1hWk4FZBAqN9bdX2Qlbxcba5Z3e2JQuSsIeHi6JMeZLTclMC
         6/GJo/+tntmsCufEoZdkjCWJB0YT3yiYILm9g=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id r9mr5326868qce.189.1306942086187; Wed,
 01 Jun 2011 08:28:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 08:28:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <gerald07@example.org>
References: <gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 18:28:05 +0300
Message-ID: <gerald07@example.org>
Subject: Re: How public is public?
From: Mohammad Nour El-Din <gerald07@example.org>
To: gerald07@example.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

Hi all...

   Maybe it is too late to reply on this thread but I only got time now :).

Based on the for items William mentioned [1], the second point should
be started on the mailing list, most probably the dev@, of that
specific team/project and then it can be announced on this one.

For the rest of the points, it can be either proposed or announced on
this one, in that way we can use the already existing public mailing
lists.

This is actually happens already, like the meet-up of OpenEJB(ers) in
France and Itally happened this and last year. It was all managed on
the dev@ of OpenEJB.

[1] - http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-apachecon-discuss/201105=
.gerald07@example.org%3E

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:02 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<gerald07@example.org> wrote:
> On 5/25/2011 12:19 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
>>
>> One question though is on approval for events - where would this happen?=
 Especially for
>> small events that are seeking a budget, should that be on the open list =
or something like
>> concom@?
>
> Draft submitted via wiki, details drilled down on the open list. =A0The v=
oting
> itself and confidential concerns can obviously be taken up by concom-inte=
rnal...
> but the results disclosed on the public list. =A0Heck, votes could even b=
e tallied
> on the wiki, sparing both lists +1 noise.
>
>> I'm torn here, I'm not sure about doing that on an open list (in the way=
 that
>> lots of PMCs do committer votes in private). However, most proposals cha=
nge slightly and
>> get some good feedback in the approval step, and that feels to me like t=
he
>> feedback/comment bits should be on the list that the proposal is worked =
up on. Hmm...
>
> Yes, the goal should be as much discussion on the public list as possible=
.
> Only issues involving people and internal concom mechanics (moving budget
> moneys around etc) should be taken to the private list.
>
>



--=20
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
=A0 Author of (WebSphere Application Server Community Edition 2.0 User Guid=
e)
=A0 http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg247585.html
- LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mnour
- Blog: http://tadabborat.blogspot.com
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein

"Writing clean code is what you must do in order to call yourself a
professional. There is no reasonable excuse for doing anything less
than your best."
- Clean Code: A Handbook of Agile Software Craftsmanship

"Stay hungry, stay foolish."
- Steve Jobs

From apachecongerald07@example.org  Wed Jun  1 16:15:10 2011
Return-Path: <apachecongerald07@example.org>
X-Original-To: gerald07@example.org
Delivered-To: gerald07@example.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [83.161.120.155])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0391865F7
	for <gerald07@example.org>; Wed,  1 Jun 2011 16:15:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 62233 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 16:15:09 -0000
Delivered-To: gerald07@example.org
Received: (qmail 62208 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 16:15:09 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gerald07@example.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Post: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Id: <apachecon-discuss.apache.org>
Reply-To: gerald07@example.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gerald07@example.org
Received: (qmail 62200 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jun 2011 16:15:09 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:15:09 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO p3plsmtpa07-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net) (83.161.120.155)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:15:02 +0000
Received: (qmail 6213 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2011 16:14:41 -0000
Received: from unknown (83.161.120.155)
  by p3plsmtpa07-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (83.161.120.155) with ESMTP; 01 Jun 2011 16:14:40 -0000
Message-ID: <gerald07@example.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 11:14:40 -0500
From: "William A. Rowe Jr." <gerald07@example.org>
Reply-To: gerald07@example.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20110414 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gerald07@example.org
Subject: Re: How public is public?
References: <gerald07@example.org>	<gerald07@example.org>	<gerald07@example.org>	<gerald07@example.org>	<gerald07@example.org>	<gerald07@example.org>	<gerald07@example.org> <gerald07@example.org>
In-Reply-To: <gerald07@example.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 6/1/2011 10:28 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
> 
> This is actually happens already, like the meet-up of OpenEJB(ers) in
> France and Itally happened this and last year. It was all managed on
> the dev@ of OpenEJB.

+1 - however we strongly encourage these groups to communicate to the
wider foundation as a whole.

For example, TrafficServer decided to hold a f2f.  When this was mentioned
to ConCom, httpd/apr projects expressed interest and so this became a
slightly larger event with further benefit to the ASF.

From apachecongerald07@example.org  Wed Jun  1 16:54:22 2011
Return-Path: <apachecongerald07@example.org>
X-Original-To: gerald07@example.org
Delivered-To: gerald07@example.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [83.161.120.155])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 17270636B
	for <gerald07@example.org>; Wed,  1 Jun 2011 16:54:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 61884 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 16:54:22 -0000
Delivered-To: gerald07@example.org
Received: (qmail 61851 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 16:54:22 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gerald07@example.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Post: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Id: <apachecon-discuss.apache.org>
Reply-To: gerald07@example.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gerald07@example.org
Received: (qmail 61843 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jun 2011 16:54:21 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:54:21 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10
	tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of gerald07@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender)
Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-qy0-f171.google.com) (83.161.120.155)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:54:17 +0000
Received: by qyj19 with SMTP id 19so2321500qyj.2
        for <gerald07@example.org>; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 09:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=2qTzmWiBents1BPKDehSLfDdtW98PaWA76NOTv5HxWA=;
        b=ftiwgd0fEjNRqz0HD5ExJ6YOG8wpAmie2Nwdz1xvn4TFrDqClR8PKD4ztxAxrIWXSM
         IXmsJ81QhmXZJoOgxVFjI8S3XMKFFPbBQkF3kv06DFw4qtGvrr6XmIupKb6oxvwHefo4
         b5vrISOFaGGbEBEIkemefSnZN4OP4bLqthqEw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=nKd0iHhU1uACm5w+jyIGuropMgA47JEdhBTz7fdYHxveq/wjM4Zm+yq3VjkJIbGv+Y
         C1ppYsk7ZDlxwZW9JrcsyKZfq8b9OUOcRyRuCGlqSL5VNqlRsuCEfa8AbGbuY49D4W4g
         FqLRQJnulTG0E8k3W5RL4vgMgWZHwEw7cZmIM=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id r9mr5417304qce.189.1306947236701; Wed,
 01 Jun 2011 09:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 09:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <gerald07@example.org>
References: <gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
	<gerald07@example.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 19:53:56 +0300
Message-ID: <gerald07@example.org>
Subject: Re: How public is public?
From: Mohammad Nour El-Din <gerald07@example.org>
To: gerald07@example.org, gerald07@example.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thats what I mean William :D, that is after the project group make a
vote on their dev@, the PMC or PPMC and or Mentors in case of a
podling is *encouraged* to share this on concom@ as a wider public
channel.

By *encouraged*, IDK whether it is better to make as *SHOULD* or a
*MUST*, I mean do we want to *manage* and/or *control*/*organize* such
event in a centralized way through ConCom or only it is preferable to
make it go through ConCom. Thoughts ?

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:14 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<gerald07@example.org> wrote:
> On 6/1/2011 10:28 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
>>
>> This is actually happens already, like the meet-up of OpenEJB(ers) in
>> France and Itally happened this and last year. It was all managed on
>> the dev@ of OpenEJB.
>
> +1 - however we strongly encourage these groups to communicate to the
> wider foundation as a whole.
>
> For example, TrafficServer decided to hold a f2f. =A0When this was mentio=
ned
> to ConCom, httpd/apr projects expressed interest and so this became a
> slightly larger event with further benefit to the ASF.
>



--=20
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
=A0 Author of (WebSphere Application Server Community Edition 2.0 User Guid=
e)
=A0 http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg247585.html
- LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mnour
- Blog: http://tadabborat.blogspot.com
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein

"Writing clean code is what you must do in order to call yourself a
professional. There is no reasonable excuse for doing anything less
than your best."
- Clean Code: A Handbook of Agile Software Craftsmanship

"Stay hungry, stay foolish."
- Steve Jobs

From apachecongerald07@example.org  Wed Jun  1 17:37:31 2011
Return-Path: <apachecongerald07@example.org>
X-Original-To: gerald07@example.org
Delivered-To: gerald07@example.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [83.161.120.155])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2E591682D
	for <gerald07@example.org>; Wed,  1 Jun 2011 17:37:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 53980 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 17:37:31 -0000
Delivered-To: gerald07@example.org
Received: (qmail 53953 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 17:37:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gerald07@example.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Post: <mailto:gerald07@example.org>
List-Id: <apachecon-discuss.apache.org>
Reply-To: gerald07@example.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gerald07@example.org
Received: (qmail 53945 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jun 2011 17:37:31 -0000
Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (83.161.120.155)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 17:37:31 +0000
Received: from localhost (HELO mail-iw0-f178.google.com) (83.161.120.155)
  (smtp-auth username noirin, mechanism plain)
  by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 17:37:30 +0000
Received: by iwn9 with SMTP id 9so45641iwn.23
        for <gerald07@example.org>; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 10:37:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id v18mr9261794ibk.42.1306949850203; Wed,
 01 Jun 2011 10:37:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 10:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <gerald07@example.org>
References: <gerald07@example.org> <gerald07@example.org>
 <gerald07@example.org> <gerald07@example.org>
 <gerald07@example.org> <gerald07@example.org>
 <gerald07@example.org> <gerald07@example.org>
 <gerald07@example.org> <gerald07@example.org>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?N=F3ir=EDn_Plunkett?= <gerald07@example.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 19:37:10 +0200
Message-ID: <gerald07@example.org>
Subject: Re: How public is public?
To: gerald07@example.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
<gerald07@example.org> wrote:
> Thats what I mean William :D, that is after the project group make a
> vote on their dev@, the PMC or PPMC and or Mentors in case of a
> podling is *encouraged* to share this on concom@ as a wider public
> channel.
>
> By *encouraged*, IDK whether it is better to make as *SHOULD* or a
> *MUST*, I mean do we want to *manage* and/or *control*/*organize* such
> event in a centralized way through ConCom or only it is preferable to
> make it go through ConCom. Thoughts ?
>

Currently, the events policy says that folk MUST let ConCom know about
their events if they want to use ASF trademarks. I'd suggest that this
includes any PMC organised events too.

That doesn't mean we have to be involved in the organisation of those
events, in any way :-) But we do need to know about them.

Noirin


{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}