Hi, Hen,
Thanks a lot for your feedback, it is very valuable!
I should have been probably more explicit about idea and intention of providing
users with office hours channel of communication. The idea behind office hours
is to provide an additional communication channel to Apache MXNet users. It
doesn't have an intention to replace or even supplement communication on dev@
list or other, more broader forums. In fact the proposal here is for very
specific need that some users might have. Namely, it is to help with specific
issues that users are having while trying to use/play/adopt Apache MXNet for
_their_ need. Which might or might not be relevant and/or interesting to
broader community. One more benefit of having office hours as additional
channel of communication is that users could have some more or less definitive
timeline to get answers to their questions and help with their project planning.
As part of the office hours process we will ensure to follow up on each issue
filed and describe what was the answer (if anything definitive) to user's
question. That is why we are proposing to use Apache JIRA to keep track of this
additional communication channel. This way we are going to ensure that none of
the communication falls off searchable surface.
Also, regarding your concern about diverse community. We are proposing office
hours as additional channel of communication. It might not be suitable for
everyone, especially if timeslot that we will be providing doesn't work with
user's local time zone. While we would like to support more timeslots - we
would need to work with Apache MXNet contributors across the world to figure
out strategy to do that, at this time we only have resources to support
proposed timeslot.
We definitely not impose any requirements for users and require them to use
office hours, it is very much optional and additional channel to be used on per
need basis. Users are free to use it or not to. We are driving this in order to
provide more ways to users to get help with adopting Apache MXNet.
Please let me know if these clarifications address your concerns about the
proposal. I would be interested in knowing whether this makes sense and what
are your thoughts on it.
--
Thanks,
Denis
On 7/23/18, 8:02 PM, "Hen" <bay...@apache.org> wrote:
My concerns on Office Hours are:
1) Voice and F2F are not very welcoming for a diverse community. There I
am, sitting in New Zealand, and you want me to get on the phone and wake up
the rest of the family to have a conversation. Or get on a plane.
2) Having to book time is also not very welcoming. I would expect the
booking time notion to happen because too many requests for help are
happening and it's not possible to handle them all; or because no one ever
shows up (in which case congrats, free time for the committers to chat
about ideas - provided it doesn't stop people asking for help).
Have you tried the more classic Open Source approach of a specific time on
an IM channel to discuss? Apache often uses IRC (irc.freenode.net).
Hen
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 7:36 PM, Naveen Swamy <mnnav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey All, just created a INFRA ticket(https://issues.apache.o
> rg/jira/browse/INFRA-16805) requesting a new Issue Type "Office Hours" on
> JIRA to better manage and support Office hours request.
>
> One feedback I received was that "Apache" was neither mentioned in the
> discussion nor in the PROPOSAL on the wiki. This is a valid feedback and I
> have fixed the PROPOSAL.
> I propose the office hours under discussion should be explicitly called
> "Apache MXNet Office hours".
>
> Also, Apache INFRA asked to create INFRA tickets only through mentors
>
> Can one of the mentors kindly help take this ticket forward.
>
> Thanks, Naveen
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Pedro Larroy <
> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Yes Naveen, I think you are saying exactly the same as I hinted. Sheng
> also
> > agreed with this.
> >
> > Pedro.
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM Naveen Swamy <mnnav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I do not think there needs to be a distinction made for
> > > support/office-hours by committer or contributors(in this case Amazon
> > > employed contributors) -- correct me if I misunderstood your guess :).
> > > Like I said, I would rather call it MXNet Office hours and categorize
> the
> > > kind of support that is offered, we might be able to find contributors
> > > willing to do this in different parts of the world regardless of their
> > day
> > > job or not.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Sheng Zha <szha....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm guessing Mu's intention is to make it clear that such invitation
> is
> > > > extended by teams in Amazon/AWS instead of by committers, so as to
> > avoid
> > > > the confusion of the naming "MXNet SDK". Suggestions to achieve the
> > same
> > > > goal are welcome.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > -sz
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Isabel Drost-Fromm <
> isa...@apache.org
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 18/07/18 23:30, Mu Li wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> A minor suggestion: rename MXNet SDK to AWS MXNet SDK or Amazon
> > MXNet
> > > > SDK.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > What exactly is the Amazon MXNet SDK? What is the AWS MXNet SDK?
> > > > >
> > > > > Your suggestion triggered my question because:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#products
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Isabel
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
