> What do you mean :) ? Could you elaborate please Wei? The original word used was “allowed”. I think the actors are not just “allowed” to redact PII when publishing, they “should” redact it instead.
Best, Wei > On Dec 7, 2025, at 7:38 PM, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Just say "within 2 months" to be more explicit. > > Indeed. > >> Also, I think we "should" redact PII instead. > > What do you mean :) ? Could you elaborate please Wei? > > I think we need to be very precise here. Privacy is important for the ASF - > for example recently CSP (Content Security Policy) have been made a lot > stricter by the ASF and we had to remove some of the links to external > parties (youtube videos now are strictly "click to play" and youtube > thumbnails are downloaded now from our site to protect privacy. And for > example it is impossible to embed (I just tried with release calendar) for > example Google Calendar in a wiki page hosted at cwiki.apache.org - mostly > because ASF does not want to "force" people into their data being gathered > by 3rd-parties by **just** looking at ASF pages. > > My understanding is that this is really a requirement that the PII data is > only gathered to protect the survey from being abused and nothing else and > we won't even see it (neither whoever runs the survey will collect them for > other purposes than fraudulent mis-use detection and protection. The PII > are very hard to not get on incoming requests - for example full client IP > address is considered PII) and you will **get** it when someone makes a > request, you also need to use it in case you have spam or AI slop to filter > out obvious mis-use. And to be honest we as PMC don't even want to deal > with it. Also, we might ask the privacy team of ASF to review the survey > setup before it is run in case there is no suitable ASF infrastructure > solution. > >> Does this imply the PMC should have a call for sponsors before the end of > the calendar year? > > Might be a good idea to indeed formalise the calendar? > Yep I think it's a good idea to announce we want to run it and ask for > potential sponsors. Say June - open it up with September to run it - > November to finish and January next year to announce results ? > > > On Sun, Dec 7, 2025 at 6:12 AM Wei Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > >> + 1 binding >> >> A few nitpicks and questions >> >>> * The full, raw results for the survey should be published in full >> each year for the entire community to read and benefit from. Publish >> must be timely within 1-2 months after closure. The only >> scrubbing/redacting allowed is of PII data or obvious fraudulent >> answers. >> >> Just say "within 2 months" to be more explicit. Also, I think we "should" >> redact PII instead. >> >>> * If any entity wants to support/sponsor the survey and take the cost >> connected with running, processing the survey - we will welcome such >> sponsorship. This needs to be an explicit request after a call for >> sponsors to the PMC and PMC has to approve it >> >> Does this imply the PMC should have a call for sponsors before the end of >> the calendar year? >> >> >> Best, >> Wei >> >>> On Dec 7, 2025, at 1:03 AM, Shahar Epstein <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> +1 binding - I think that these principles should be visible in the wiki >> :) >>> >>> >>> Shahar >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2025, 00:09 Jens Scheffler <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> It has been pointed out that the way we run our yearly community survey >>>> happens by inertia, without any formality to it. Now while I’m never one >>>> for too much formality, some here would be helpful. >>>> We discussed it in the Airflow PMC and with the outcome we now raise a >>>> vote on the devlist in public. Proposal is we formally accept the >>>> following: >>>> >>>> * A yearly Airflow Community survey should be run, and it should run >>>> proximate to the end of the calendar year. >>>> * The intent of this survey is to understand the use of the software >>>> and features used in order to understand where to focus future >>>> development on and which features might be deprecated. But not >>>> limited to. We are also interested in perceived quality and biggest >>>> problems for which we even might need to elaborate a solution space. >>>> * The questions for which are discussed on the dev list. We should >>>> have a final lazy consensus to the dev list (or vote if we don’t see >>>> consensus) on the questions before the survey is published. No >>>> formal vote is required before finalising the questions or starting >>>> the survey. It would be good to keep a majority of questions stable >>>> such that we can see changes year-over-year. >>>> * Questions must not involve collecting PII data. One exception is the >>>> optional collecting of email addresses for delivering sponsor >>>> incentives (i.e. training course, credits. See further on in this >>>> document) >>>> * There is no formal position or person responsible for generating the >>>> questions. As with everything ASF related, all individuals are given >>>> the opportunity to participate, but their influence is based on >>>> publicly earned merit. >>>> * The PMC will promote the survey via airflow.apache.org website - >>>> including the banners on the website, and Apache Airflow Social >>>> Media, Slack and similar channels. >>>> * The survey should be conducted in a way such that not one person or >>>> company gets more information than the others. >>>> * The results should be processed/analysed and a summary published on >>>> the Airflow website (and thus subject to normal PR review process by >>>> committers and the PMC). >>>> * The full, raw results for the survey should be published in full >>>> each year for the entire community to read and benefit from. Publish >>>> must be timely within 1-2 months after closure. The only >>>> scrubbing/redacting allowed is of PII data or obvious fraudulent >>>> answers. >>>> * In case there is no appropriate survey platform run by the ASF >>>> available for under the “apache.org” URL, the entity or people >>>> running the survey will be free to host it elsewhere. >>>> * If any entity wants to support/sponsor the survey and take the cost >>>> connected with running, processing the survey - we will welcome such >>>> sponsorship. This needs to be an explicit request after a call for >>>> sponsors to the PMC and PMC has to approve it. We will also leave >>>> freedom for the entity running the survey in the way to attract wide >>>> audience (for example offering credits or free products as long as >>>> they do not suggest being PMC endorsed; and to refer Apache Airflow >>>> according to the nominative fair use. >>>> * In cases of such sponsorship, the entity will be listed as sponsor >>>> permanently in the published Survey results - this is in accordance >>>> with the targeted-sponsorship policy of the ASF. We will inform >>>> Fundraising of the ASF about this being a formal targeted >>>> sponsorship by the PMC. >>>> >>>> This is just writing down what we do already (with the exception of the >>>> last two points which are a new addition and a more formal approach to >>>> the ad-hoc basis right now). >>>> >>>> Jens on behalf of the Airflow PMC. >>>> >>>> This email is calling a vote for the procedure, which will last for 5 >>>> days - which means that it will end on December 8th, 2025 22:00 UTC. >>>> Everyone is encouraged to vote, although only PMC members and >>>> Committer's votes are considered binding. Members of the community are >>>> encouraged to vote with "(non-binding)". >>>> >>>> Consider this my +1 (binding) vote. >>>> >>>> Please vote accordingly: >>>> >>>> [ ] +1 approve >>>> [ ] +0 no opinion >>>> [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason >>>> >> >>
