There is a vote about some of the technical process for the survey that was started last week. I'll see if I can kick that into gear.
On 11/12/2019 10:26 PM, Sally Khudairi wrote: > I haven't heard back from anyone about this. > > Word has been out via social media for weeks [1], yet still nothing formally. > > It's November. Let's sort this out. I can't help if you don't respond. > > Regards, > Sally > > [1] https://twitter.com/iemejia/status/1175040239640961025 > > - - - > Vice President Marketing & Publicity > Vice President Sponsor Relations > The Apache Software Foundation > > Tel +1 617 921 8656 | [email protected] > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019, at 08:01, Sally Khudairi wrote: >> Thank you, Katia. >> >> Ideally we'd have a bit more information. >> >> I've spoken with Gris (copied) about ways to formally announce D&I and drive >> participation. As this is the first initiative coming out of D&I --and that >> we're asking folks for something-- I recommend: >> >> a) an email to ASF Members letting them know that D&I will be launching the >> survey and that we'd like their participation (I will send this, as this is >> a restricted list). >> >> b) send an email to Apache Committers inviting them to participate in the >> survey. Here's what I recommend the email contain: >> >> 1- greeting and context (briefly introduce D&I, as it's likely that the >> majority of the 7,000 recipients on this list don't know what this is). >> >> 2- explanation of the survey and what we're looking for, including how much >> time will it take or how many questions are involved --whichever is shorter: >> people don't like to feel imposed upon or inconvenienced. Clearly state what >> is the timeframe here: is there a deadline? What is it? >> >> 3- a pointer to where they can get more information and become involved >> with D&I if they are interested in participating and opt-in to join the D&I >> mailing list(s). This should point to https://diversity.apache.org/ and a >> link to the survey should be here. >> >> 4- thanks and call-to-action to help spread the word, etc. >> >> >> Do you have a timeline for this survey? When will results be shared, or how >> will the data be used? Folks would be interested in knowing this, so please >> be sure to have this information available off https://diversity.apache.org/ >> or in a blog post somewhere. >> >> I'm happy to help with getting the word out, so having the proper >> publicly-accessible email (archived) to point to is important. >> >> Please remember that the Committers mailing list is _not_ an interactive >> discucssion medium: it is primarily used for Foundation-wide announcements >> and is used _very_ sparingly. We should not anticipate regular posts to this >> list. >> >> I'd appreciate it if you can please forward a draft of the above-described >> email so we can fine-tune and coordinate messaging between a) and b). >> >> Kind regards, >> Sally >> >> - - - >> Vice President Marketing & Publicity >> Vice President Sponsor Relations >> The Apache Software Foundation >> >> Tel +1 617 921 8656 | [email protected] >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019, at 04:26, Katia Rojas wrote: >>> Hi Sally, >>> >>> Sorry about that. >>> >>> We would like to share this survey with contributors involved with the ASF. >>> Where contributors is something bigger than committers, could included non >>> committers. >>> >>> The main purpose of this survey is to gather feedback from existing ASF >>> contributors about the current level of diversity and inclusion, including >>> education, age, socio-economic status, and gender. >>> >>> Which mailing list would be appropriate? >>> Thanks >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 at 03:08, Sally Khudairi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Thank you, Katia. >>>> >>>> I've seen you trying to send multiple emails to committers@ along with >>>> whatever is being disseminated to the [email protected] list. >>>> >>>> This is improper use of the committers@ email --this list is restricted to >>>> very specific types of messages. We cannot be copying 7,000+ recipients on >>>> every conversational message or project update. This why none of your >>>> messages have been moderated through. >>>> >>>> Please let me know specifically what you're looking for (what is your >>>> intended outcome) so we can sort out the best way to proceed with a >>>> tactical plan. >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Sally >>>> >>>> - - - >>>> Vice President Marketing & Publicity >>>> Vice President Sponsor Relations >>>> The Apache Software Foundation >>>> >>>> Tel +1 617 921 8656 | [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019, at 20:40, Katia Rojas wrote: >>>>> Good point. >>>>> >>>>> I ping press@. Sally, could you help us? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 at 02:06, Niclas Hedhman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Sally would probably be very helpful to reach a wider group. She has >>>>>> direct >>>>>> lines with media and it is likely that some/many of these would assist in >>>>>> getting the message out. Could perhaps also contact StackOverflow >>>>>> (others?) >>>>>> and see if they would be interested to help out with maybe a small >>>>>> paragraph in their newsletter. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 11:52 PM Katia Rojas <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, Shane. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And what about sending it to: >>>>>>> [email protected] and >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> As the *effective* group of people we can contact with hopes of >>>>>>> responses? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Would be acceptable to define “contributor” in this survey as people >>>>>>> involved with the ASF and that we could reach them out by the mailing >>>>>>> lists? >>>>>>> How could we justify being more inclusive but at the same time effective >>>>>>> because sending postal cards or phone calls or any other channel >>>>>>> different >>>>>>> from email is not viable. Is it possible to justify or not? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I understand that “all” is a big term and might be impossible to be >>>>>>> done if >>>>>>> we are strict with the terminology and what it implies so my question >>>>>>> would >>>>>>> be is it possible or desirable to focus on committers and a sector of >>>>>>> non >>>>>>> committers (don’t know how small or big it would be dev@) to get an >>>>>>> initial >>>>>>> idea of the barriers they are encountering while trying to join us? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I can see both points of view. I am not 100 percent sure if it is better >>>>>>> this way or the other. From my perspective, only committers is limited >>>>>>> but >>>>>>> I struggle justifying or defining the definition of “contributors” that >>>>>>> we >>>>>>> are using here and that it doesn’t have to be necessarily a definition >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> be used in other projects. I think there is space to define this term >>>>>>> but I >>>>>>> wouldn’t like to be arbitrary and exclude people because it is not >>>>>>> possible >>>>>>> to contact them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 16:46, Shane Curcuru <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Katia Rojas wrote on 2019-10-23 3:22PM GMT+2: >>>>>>>> ...snip... >>>>>>>>> Where should we send the survey that we've been working on? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So far there is a strong opinion on sending it only to the >>>>>>>>> [email protected] <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The main purpose of this survey is to gather feedback from all >>>>>>>>> existing >>>>>>>> ASF >>>>>>>>> contributors about the current level of diversity and inclusion, >>>>>>>> including >>>>>>>>> education, age, socio-economic status, and gender. >>>>>>>> ...snip... >>>>>>>> "All existing ASF contributors" is tens of thousands of people, many of >>>>>>>> whom we may not have any effective way to contact (i.e. drive-by >>>>>>>> contributors to various Apache projects in the past). So defining >>>>>>>> "contributor" is important; it's also important to decide what >>>>>>>> *effective* group of people we can contact with hopes of responses. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> dev@diversity will only get a very small number of highly self-selected >>>>>>>> individuals, so is no where near what we need. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It seems to me (and I'm not on the survey team), the best thing to do >>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>> mirror the existing 2016 survey and send a single, well-written email >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> [email protected] asking all Apache committers to respond. While >>>>>>>> that won't catch non-committers who have contributed, it's a very >>>>>>>> important metric to start with, and is much easier than trying to >>>>>>>> contact all-dev@ lists or use the giant announce@ list. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I understand the goal; but the effort and effectiveness for reaching >>>>>>>> *all* contributors is much higher. It feels like getting a really solid >>>>>>>> set of committer data first might be best. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Does that make sense? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Note also that there are specific technical rules for successfully >>>>>>>> emailing committers@ or other wide lists, so be sure to work with infra >>>>>>>> or someone to get help before physically sending the mail. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Shane >>>>>>>> Director & Member >>>>>>>> The Apache Software Foundation >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer >>>>>> http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java -- Kevin A. McGrail [email protected] Member, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
