On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 13:33:45 +0200
(Subject: Re: Press PR (was Re: The board is not responsible!))
Erik Abele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't want to be an "enthusiasm blocker" but I have to agree with
> what Justin already said. Tetsuya, do you think that the suggested
> split-ups are reducing the amount of bureaucracy we already have in
> ASF-land? If so, can you please be so kind and elaborate further on
> this?
Erik, I would rather like to make that proposal more meaningful.
"the amount of bureaucracy" would *not* be related to that proposal.
I do not think that the site maintainance would fit to infrastructure
team's task. Rather, I want that committee (infra) to keep
keen eyes to exact infrastructural issues and "not to omit important
mails coming to infra@ and root@".
As for mailing lists maintainance, I think "Communication" Committee
would fit to that task as well as infrastructure committee.
AAMOF, when I subscribed to some mailing lists, I got stunned
at seeing the fact that some mailing lists accepted spam mails.
I thought that this was tightly related to the negligence of
infrastructure committees' nobless obligations. ("nobless obligations"
means that that committee did not have such an enthusiasm to
improve the mailing lists functions. infra team did well in the past,
i think ... though ...) Human beings tend not to do the tasks which
would not attract their "motivations". I assumed that infrastructure
team did not have much "motivations" to it. This is one of the reason
of that proposal.
I think "Communication" Committee can establish a policy of the
mailing lists maintainances. For example,
what I often see at the new mailing lists are the omit of
"Reply-To:" Header. I do not think it would be acceptable
diversity. "Communication" Committee can establish such a policy.
> I'd be fine with some sort of Publicity/PR Committee doing the
> newsletter and some marketing stuff but right now I can't think of any
> good reasons which would justify a major overhaul of our infrastructure
> teams (apmail, site, etc.). Do you see something utterly broken here?
Maintanance of "site" is not "infrastructural" one. Rather, public
relations. Establishing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and FWing the mails coming
to such address to PR committee would suffice. The same goes for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Also, I think that the overall watching the XX.apache.org site
would be important. PR committee should do just "suggestions",
however, unified view would suffice the users' gratifications.
For example, see
http://maven.apache.org/
Anyone would think that maven is now under "jakarta" (see the logo).
I do not think such impressions would be good for the asf as a whole.
Who would watch these kinds of things? .... infrastructure? .. NO,
PR committee.
ApacheCon Advert?? ... PR committee.
--
Please make that proposal of the establishment of "Communication" and
"Public Relations" (PR) more meaningful. I've forgotten about that event,
which would be related to newsletter on the whole. :)
Also, please reduce the burdens of infrastructure team.
PR and Communication committees should keep good relations
with each committers/members/developers. The ultimate goal would be
"improvements of (user|member|committer|developer)-friendliness"
Cheers,
-- Tetsuya. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
