Interesting. I thought we had agreement to publish a list of third-party resources, and I thought we had agreement that we should not be endorsing any of it. I thought the contentious matter was: do we put it on the website or the wiki. (Note, these three options do not cover that.)
I would suggest that instead of a poll like this, the person who cares about it the most, and who is prepared to put in the leg work to execute on the plan put forward a concrete proposal. If nobody gives it a -1 in 72 hours, proceed with your plan. (I'd note also that we can always change our mind later, if things are not working out.) On 26 May 2013 11:49, Geoff Higginbottom <[email protected]>wrote: > +1 on option 3 > -1 on option 1 > 0 on option 2 > > Regards > > Geoff Higginbottom > CTO / Cloud Architect > > > D: +44(0)20 3603 0542<tel:+442036030542> | S: +44(0)20 3603 0540<tel: > +442036030540> | M: +44(0)7968161581<tel:+447968161581> > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > | www.shapeblue.com > > ShapeBlue Ltd, 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS > > > > On 25 May 2013, at 22:13, "Giles Sirett" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > +1 on option 3 > > This voting is getting TOO complicated > > Kind Regards > Giles > > D: +44 20 3603 0541<tel:+44%2020%203603%200541> | M: +44 796 111 2055 > <tel:+44%20796%20111%202055> > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto: > [email protected]> > > On 25 May 2013, at 22:00, "[email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>" < > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected] > ><mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > I would vote for option 3, > > Myself and other creators of external community supporting products have > never asked for endorsement. We simply seek acknowledgement. > > Sent from my HTC > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Kelly Hair" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected] > ><mailto:[email protected]>> > To: "[email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>" > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected] > ><mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: Packt Book - Publish on our website? > Date: Sat, May 25, 2013 12:54 PM > > Wonder if it's best to come up with 3 options to vote yeah/nah on. Is it > too early to vote on? > > I'm on a plane so may be missing the most recent on this thread. Did see > before boarding on my mobile that Giles had a good suggestion of having an > "unendorsed/unofficial community" section of the page. > > So.. options could be: > 1) Do not create a list of external information sources. > 2) Create an endorsed/official list of external information services > 3) Create an unendorsed/"caveat emptor" list of external information > services. > > Agree with the concern of mind share Giles pointed out should option 1 win > out. So, personally I'd vote no to option 1 but yes to both options 2 & > 3. > > > PS - apologies if this is repeat by the time I sync up! > > > > > > On 5/24/13 3:01 PM, "Noah Slater" <[email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > On 24 May 2013 21:54, Sebastien Goasguen <[email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]><mailto:[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. > > > 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. > > > 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]<mailto: > [email protected]><mailto:[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. > > > 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 > This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or > opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the > intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based > upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender > if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a > company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is > operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered > trademark. > This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or > opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the > intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based > upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender > if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a > company incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is > operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered > trademark. > -- NS
