On May 24, 2013, at 6:01 PM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 24 May 2013 21:54, Sebastien Goasguen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Quite flabbergasted actually. What's wrong with a book icon on a webpage ? >> > > We've been over the opposing arguments several time in this thread. > Not well enough apparently because I still don't get them. > >> Checking their book for sanity is a 10 minute deal, one evening if you >> want to be thorough. > > > I think you underestimate how much time it takes to review a book for > quality. Or perhaps we have different interpretations of what a review > would comprise. Note that David spent several evenings on this (I believe) > before he found a problem. > I have reviewed many books/papers , I don't think I underestimate things. I am not talking about proof reading or editing a book. I am talking about a "sanity check". We are not in a position to review or edit since the book is published. > >> We are spending more time discussing it than it would take doing it. >> Having the Packt book is terrific, there is no being neutral about this. >> > > Discussion-lead consensus-building is an important part of how we make > decisions. :) And it's up to the community to decide how neutral or > circumspect we wish to be about third-party resources. > > > On 24 May 2013 22:06, Kelcey Jamison Damage <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I can't imagine this has anything to do with the quality of work at this >> point but is primarily a political discussion. >> > > Yes, I believe we are talking about the general case here. (Note: not > "political" but "project".) > > >> I do think the fact I hammered into Packt the value of being a friend of >> the community and following our rules, and product usage guidelines >> resulted in an offer to donate 2% of revenue to the project, is another >> strong gesture of positivity. >> > > Agreed. Similarly, when people donate to us, they get a mention on > http://www.apache.org/foundation/thanks.html — but nothing more. We never > endorse people in return for their contributions. > And I don't believe Kelcey and I are talking about "endorsing", I specifically mentioned a disclaimer that would say "we do not endorse" > >> A lot of time and effort went into this book from a community perspective >> and not a commercial one. Yes someone is making money, but at least Packt >> reached out and got committers and community members to >> co-write/advise/edit the book prior to publication, and then after >> publication reached back out to the community. Those action have impressed >> me greatly. >> > > I don't think anyone has any problem with people making money off the back > of CloudStack. Strikes me as a great thing! > > >> I am not sure how assisting the community in locating print materials is >> bad for us in any way. >> > > The arguments have been covered a few times in this thread already. > > -- > NS
