Hi Hal, I don't have any huge objections to concalls if that's the way things were done before, provided that decisions are made on the mailing list.
However, I suggest that maybe for a limited time we could conduct all communication via the mailing list. One problem I'm having with this project is a grasp of who is working on it, where it is going etc. By discussing stuff on the call (which I will not attend), I am not getting a feel for the project. No one is committing any code, apart from me :-), I guess due to the ICLA situation. So do we really need concalls? Or are you maintaining patches somewhere else for the time being? Colm. On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Hal Lockhart <[email protected]> wrote: > I am sorry if I have offended anyone. We are trying to follow the Apache > Way and have an project that is open to all. We have discovered that many > of the "rules" do not seem to be written down anywhere, which makes the > Mentors a vital resource. > > Yes, Emmanuel I carefully read your message. I also received a message > from Hadrian around the same time in which he said in part: > > "It is ok to communicate any way you want via any channel you want (voice > or not). What is not ok is to make decisions that way. So if you use a more > interactive channel to speed up the exchange of ideas (many projects use > irc for instance) you need to bring that decision back to the > non-interactive mailing list where the ASF community build consensus. The > reason, mentioned by Emmanuel, is that communities are strong when people > feel included. > > So minutes are great, but the phrasing should be more like: "discussed the > pros and cons of ...", "proposed to ...", etc and encourage the rest of the > community to provide comments, feedback, suggestions. If no > counter-proposals in a reasonable amount of time (typically 72 hours), you > can declare lazy consensus and move forward." > > Since the project has been having a call every other week since its start, > I was attempting to follow Hadrian's model. In the Agenda I circulated I > tried to make it clear that we would only discuss items and not make > decisions. I intended to write the notes from the meeting as Hadrian > indicated. > > I am not trying to be contentious or argumentative here. I am just trying > to learn how Apache works and what is most practical for OpenAz. In past > the calls have been useful in providing a goad to stimulate people to > complete their action items and to facilitate rapid back and forth > discussion. However, in the past I personally have been an outsider looking > in on projects like this and I have no desire to even give the impression > that anyone has been excluded. > > Two minor points: I do not agree that voice meetings cannot be conducted > with people in many time zones. Many such groups operate successfully > today. To cite just one example, one of the key contributors on the XACML > TC in the early days lives in Japan. One of the current participants lives > in Australia. Second, the phone bridge provided by Oracle is accessible > from local phone numbers around the world. I forgot to publish a list of > the numbers, but had intended to do that today. > > However, based on your advice, I will immediately cancel the previously > announced call and start a thread on the mailing list inviting discussion > about if and when we should have calls. > > Hal > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Emmanuel Lécharny [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 6:33 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: OpenAz Conference Call - Thursday May 7, 1 PM ET > > > > Le 06/05/15 19:14, Hal Lockhart a écrit : > > > Phone Bridge 1-408-774-4073 > > > code 4480739 > > > Pass 123456 > > > > > > Thanks to David Laurance - JPMC, we will have a webex available to > > facilitate discussion. > > > > Ok, just to be sure, what in my previous mail about conference calls > > did you missed ??? > > > > > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com
