I vote +1 on the reopened vote just to be explicitly clear.
--
Kevin A. McGrail
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171


On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 5:59 PM Gris Cuevas <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi folks - I missed this thread due to wrong filtering on my inbox, sorry
> about that.
>
>
> As VP of D&I I'm satisfied with the proposal Kevin stated in this vote. I
> see it as the most viable option to move forward safely and effectively.
> Not only Kevin has done some due diligence on reviewing LimeSurvey from a
> security and privacy perspective, but Bitergia, our vendor, has also
> recommended the system based in their experience working with other OSS
> projects.
>
> I also see that Kevin has addressed most of the concerns brought up by the
> people in this thread, and I'm supportive of moving forward with the
> following plan:
>
> 1. Use LimeSurvey as the platform for the EDI Survey and share visibly a
> link to their data privacy policy.
> 2. Upload a list of all apache.org email addresses to LimeSurvey and send
> direct emails to individuals
> 3. Use a re-usable token for a universal link that we'll use to promote
> the survey in social media
>
> I would like to re-open the vote to pursue this plan to give people the
> chance to express any other concerns. I'll close the vote by Friday and
> will assume lazy consensus by then.
>
> My vote is +1
>
> I'll be putting this plan and the vote in the board report to make sure
> the president, vice-president and the board are aware of them.
>
> Cheers,
> G
>
> On 2019/11/15 07:29:03, "Kevin A. McGrail" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > After sufficient time and a reminder, this vote does not pass to use
> > limesurvey as described below.  Despite discussion, we had no votes
> > other than my own.
> >
> > Regards,
> > KAM
> >
> > On 11/5/2019 11:33 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> > >
> > > I have researched the vendor for the D&I Survey and present the
> > > following information and vote at the bottom.  The goal of this change
> > > is technical to limit spamming as well as improve the deliverability
> > > of the survey and therefore the response rate.
> > >
> > > -KAM
> > >
> > > Operator: LimeSurvey GmbH https://www.limesurvey.org/about-us/imprint
> > >
> > > "The worldwide leading open source survey software
> > > as a professional SaaS solution or as a self-hosted Community Edition."
> > >
> > > Licensed: GPL v2 or later (https://www.limesurvey.org/stable-release)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Due to the operator being German, the data protection Terms of Service
> > > are excellent and follow BDSG, TKG and GDPR.  See
> > > https://www.limesurvey.org/policies/terms-conditions, Section 10: Data
> > > Protection.
> > >
> > > As is typical of the strong German data protection laws, the privacy
> > > policy is excellent as well:
> > > https://www.limesurvey.org/policies/privacy-policy
> > >
> > > The only nit is that technically the terms of service point to the
> > > privacy policy in German:
> > > https://www.limesurvey.org/de/richtlinien/datenschutzrichtlinie so a
> > > minor thing they should fix.
> > >
> > > Otherwise, I think it's an excellent vendor providing no concerns for
> > > the ASF to use them as a service provider for the survey.
> > >
> > > My only key recommendation is that we make sure the survey is set to
> > > "Turn on the Anonymized responses- option" which will "...mark
> > > participants who complete the survey only with a 'Y' instead of
> > > date/time to ensure the anonymity of your participants."
> > >
> > > Therefore, I call a vote and +1 to use limesurvey, request a list of
> > > committer addresses, load them into the SaaS offering and use this to
> > > send to all committers rather than use committers@ for the survey for
> > > 1 use only.
> > >
> > > We should also still allow anonymous entries, ask PMCs to post about
> > > the survey and spread the word on our social media.
> > >
> > > We should also ask Infra to join in a small test of the survey and to
> > > whitelist as appropriate the surveys on our system as well as to
> > > provide a current CSV file export to KAM to load into the survey
> software.
> > >
> > > If this vote passes, various Jira like DI-30 should be updated to
> > > reflect this approach.
> > >
> > > On 11/2/2019 3:12 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> > >> Bitergia isn't the actual sender, it would be limesurvey.  I will
> > >> look into how it sends on behalf of but the idea is not to use a
> > >> mailing list software but to have the survey software send each
> > >> individually.
> > >>
> > >> I doubt di30 talks about this as I have been suggesting offlist how
> > >> to improve the deliverability and response rate of the survey.
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Nov 2, 2019, 12:35 Sam Ruby <[email protected]
> > >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>     On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 10:26 AM Kevin A. McGrail
> > >>     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > >>     >
> > >>     > The Apache.org email addresses are easily harvested from our
> > >>     mailing
> > >>     > list archives.
> > >>     >
> > >>     > This would be an export from LDAP or similar of all @apache.org
> > >>     <http://apache.org>
> > >>     > addresses which is the same as committers@ but will be sent
> > >>     directly
> > >>     > instead of routed through a mailing list.
> > >>     >
> > >>     > There are significant deliverability and response rate concerns
> > >>     with
> > >>     > using a mailing list.
> > >>
> > >>     I may have misunderstood the intent of
> > >>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DI-30.
> > >>
> > >>     If there is a need to create an alias for all committers, that
> could
> > >>     be easily constructed.  Bitergia would send a single email to our
> > >>     infrastructure, and our infrastructure would be forwarded to each
> id
> > >>     on the list.
> > >>
> > >>     If such an alias were created, it should either be set up to only
> > >>     allow emails from known Bitergia emails, and the alias should be
> > >>     taken
> > >>     down when not in use, as it would be a vector for spam.
> > >>
> > >>     - Sam Ruby
> > >>
> > >>     > Regards,
> > >>     > KAM
> > >>     >
> > >>     > On 11/2/2019 5:53 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> > >>     > > Hi,
> > >>     > >
> > >>     > > I would also be uncomfortable in creating a list of people to
> > >>     email and making that available even internally. Pervious
> > >>     experience with surveys (non D&I) at the ASF have shown several
> > >>     times that mistake are made and/or emails addresses harvested
> > >>     without permission. If we do go down that path I would also like
> > >>     to know how we are creating this list e.g what would be the
> > >>     criteria to be on it.
> > >>     > >
> > >>     > > committers@ has a wide distribution and with correct
> > >>     messaging we can use it very little effort and risk.
> > >>     > >
> > >>     > > Thanks,
> > >>     > > Justin
> > >>     >
> > >>     > --
> > >>     > Kevin A. McGrail
> > >>     > [email protected]
> > >>     >
> > >>     > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > >>     > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > >>     > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> > >>     >
> > >>
> > > --
> > > Kevin A. McGrail
> > > [email protected]
> > >
> > > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> >
> > --
> > Kevin A. McGrail
> > [email protected]
> >
> > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to