Hi,
Given all members are very likely to be committers I'm not 100% sure we
would need to send to both? What is the intent here?
Thanks,
Justin

On Tue, 29 Oct 2019, 17:10 Gris Cuevas, <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> We are just planning to send two emails, one to committers@ and one to
> members@ with a link to the survey. I will write these emails to be
> different so it doesn't feel like a repetition. I will also space them, so
> people who receive both see the second one as a reminder, and not spam.
>
> In these emails I will ask PMCs to voluntarily share the link of the
> survey in their user@ and dev@ lists if they wish.
>
> I'm also going to ask to some projects for support directly.
>
> The key here is that the messages will be different and spaced, so they
> serve as reminders and don't feel spammy.
>
> G
>
> On 2019/10/29 11:03:52, "Kevin A. McGrail" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Definitely should not be sending to private emails.
> >
> > What we need is to simply use survey software and load in all apache.org
> > email addresses from an export.
> >
> > This is an official ASF project and as such is not spam.  Then email
> > directly.  No use of lists at all.
> >
> > And ask all pmcs to promote it and request others who are not formally
> > committers to submit.
> >
> > Regards, KAM
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 03:03 Daniel Gruno <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I would favor sending emails to the various dev@ and users@ lists over
> > > trying to gather the private email addresses of people, which is quite
> > > outside the remit of D&I. Those addresses can be obtained on an opt-in
> > > basis for later surveys. I'd much rather we live with a couple of
> > > duplicated messages for those subscribes to a lot of lists than using
> > > PII we have no right to grab.
> > >
> > > On 10/29/19 3:51 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> > > > I will show my ignorance of email here...
> > > >
> > > > When I receive the same email via a collection of mailing lists, my
> email
> > > > client (GMail) deduplicates them and shows me a single message. This
> is
> > > > actually a source of confusion when the lists have different levels
> of
> > > > privilege/privacy...
> > > >
> > > > So if we do a first round to collect which lists PMCs approve and
> then
> > > send
> > > > a single email to all lists, will that not work? I truly do not know
> the
> > > > answer to this question.
> > > >
> > > > I do think we should avoid direct-to-person emails.
> > > >
> > > > Kenn
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 7:25 PM Austin Bennett <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Patricia,
> > > >>
> > > >> That seems a straight forward infra/other issue.  Naively, seems
> someone
> > > >> could iterate through all the relevant lists and then deduplicate
> emails
> > > >> (wouldn't catch all - in instance that you have different email
> > > addresses
> > > >> in different lists -- but probably would reduce lots of duplicate
> > > >> messaging).  Though, invites the question if direct messages might
> get
> > > >> caught by spam while messages to specific lists wouldn't.  I would
> be
> > > happy
> > > >> to do this for the sake of reducing email to many, should it be
> deemed
> > > the
> > > >> sensible solution and granted the needed access to do so.
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >> Austin
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 4:10 PM Patricia Shanahan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> One danger that I don't know how to solve: In trying to reach as
> many
> > > >>> people as possible you will bombard many of us with multiple
> e-mails. I
> > > >>> am subscribed to [email protected], members@, committers@, two PMC
> > > >>> private lists, and the corresponding dev@lists. I'm going to get
> > > about 7
> > > >>> copies, and some people are subscribed to a lot more than 2
> projects.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 10/28/2019 3:49 PM, Griselda Cuevas wrote:
> > > >>>> Hi folks,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I'm back from my leave and ramping up on this project.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> First of all, I want to say THANK YOU Katia for stepping in and
> > > helping
> > > >>>> move the project forward with very little friction. To be a new
> > > >>> contributor
> > > >>>> to our community you have helped us achieve tremendous progress.
> Also
> > > >>> thank
> > > >>>> you Justin for supporting Katia and providing her with advice.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I want to also thank everyone who has contributed with feedback,
> > > >> advice,
> > > >>>> revisions and support.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I caught up with Katia and we decided on the following path
> forward:
> > > >>>> 1) Draft emails as per Sally's suggestions in this thread
> > > >>>> 2) Partner with Sally to send final message with survey to
> members@ &
> > > >>>> committers@
> > > >>>> 3) Promote survey in social media and other channels to capture
> > > >>>> non-committer participation (draft from ideas shared in this
> thread)
> > > >>>> 4) Run survey for 1 month after initial publication
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I will also be following up with the working group and Bitergia to
> > > >> catch
> > > >>> up
> > > >>>> with the rest of the project.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Cheers,
> > > >>>> G
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 14:47, Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Not sure if there was followup that makes this email obsolete.
> If so,
> > > >>>>> apologies.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Both Justin & Shane have proposed ways for the survey to reach a
> > > wider
> > > >>>>> audience than committers@. I think both of their ideas avoid any
> > > >>>>> unsolicited email. I think expanded reach is very important. For
> the
> > > >>>>> survey* results I presented at ApacheCon NA, inclusion of
> > > >> non-committers
> > > >>>>> was key to many insights.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> What do you think of their ideas? Any other ideas?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Kenn
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> *survey of people at Google who self-identified as using or
> > > >>> contributing to
> > > >>>>> ASF projects
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > > >>> https://www.avg.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to