Craig, I was tempted to ask the same but in reverse re divers...@apache.org.
I am wary of dropping the "inclusion" aspect.
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 19:48, Craig Russell wrote:
> Before we get locked into this JIRA, could we consider changing its name
> to DIVERSITY instead of DI ?
>
> Craig
>
> >
Outreachy is great and we should add that to a list of things to look into
re our efforts, working with them, etc. I met Karen Sandler in person once
and she is good people.
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 19:56, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 2:59 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> > I asked
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 2:59 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
> I asked the D folks at $dayjob for some advice / suggestions and got
> back the following:
>
> 1. Mozilla have been doing some work in this area. It was suggested we
> reach out to them to get the benefit of their experience. Anyone have
> any
Before we get locked into this JIRA, could we consider changing its name to
DIVERSITY instead of DI ?
Craig
> On Apr 2, 2019, at 10:06 AM, Griselda Cuevas wrote:
>
> @joan - I also get a Pony, I requested the Jira ;)
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 10:03 AM Joan Touzet wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
I don't know why I missed Mark's email, it appeared in a different thread
in my Gmail.
I will take your suggestions Mark and embed them into a proposal in the new
Jira board.
Thank you!!! This is inspiring, motivating and amazing.
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019, 12:59 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
> I asked
Thank you!
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 10:12 AM Daniel Gruno wrote:
> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?divers...@apache.org
>
>
>
> On 02/04/2019 12.03, Joan Touzet wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Daniel wrote:
> >
> >> Requested, and should be ready within an hour or two.
> >
> > Thank you! You get a pony!
Griselda Cuevas wrote:
> @joan - I also get a Pony, I requested the Jira ;)
Of course you do!
(Use a monospace font for best rendering...)
,--,
_ ___/ /\|
;( )__, )
; // '--;
\ |
^^
-Joan "Caaan do!" Touzet
https://lists.apache.org/list.html?divers...@apache.org
On 02/04/2019 12.03, Joan Touzet wrote:
Daniel wrote:
Requested, and should be ready within an hour or two.
Thank you! You get a pony!
-Joan "JFDI" Touzet
-
To
@Sam - let's arrange a date & time. I am on my phone (currently at
FlinkForward), but when I get my laptop I'll send a Doodle in a new thread
to schedule.
Thanks all for chiming in and helping move this forward, all get ponies :)
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 10:06 AM Griselda Cuevas wrote:
> @joan - I
@joan - I also get a Pony, I requested the Jira ;)
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 10:03 AM Joan Touzet wrote:
>
>
>
> Daniel wrote:
>
> > Requested, and should be ready within an hour or two.
>
> Thank you! You get a pony!
>
> -Joan "JFDI" Touzet
>
>
Daniel wrote:
> Requested, and should be ready within an hour or two.
Thank you! You get a pony!
-Joan "JFDI" Touzet
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
Let's you and I find some time to chat, possibly with ross and others, and
we can bring a proposal back to the list.
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 12:44 PM Griselda Cuevas
wrote:
> +1 to divers...@apache.org
>
> I want to move forward on creating a president's committee. How do I do
> that?
>
> On Tue,
On 02/04/2019 11.37, Joan Touzet wrote:
Daniel Gruno said:
On 02/04/2019 11.34, Joan Touzet wrote:
Daniel said:
On 02/04/2019 11.29, Daniel Gruno wrote:
On 02/04/2019 11.26, Joan Touzet wrote:
Trying to cut through the bikeshedding:
Daniel Gruno said:
I'd recommend a separate mailing
Daniel Gruno said:
> On 02/04/2019 11.34, Joan Touzet wrote:
> > Daniel said:
> >> On 02/04/2019 11.29, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> >>> On 02/04/2019 11.26, Joan Touzet wrote:
> Trying to cut through the bikeshedding:
>
> Daniel Gruno said:
> > I'd recommend a separate mailing
+1 to divers...@apache.org
I want to move forward on creating a president's committee. How do I do
that?
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 9:36 AM Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 02/04/2019 11.34, Joan Touzet wrote:
> > Daniel said:
> >> On 02/04/2019 11.29, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> >>> On 02/04/2019 11.26, Joan
On 02/04/2019 11.34, Joan Touzet wrote:
Daniel said:
On 02/04/2019 11.29, Daniel Gruno wrote:
On 02/04/2019 11.26, Joan Touzet wrote:
Trying to cut through the bikeshedding:
Daniel Gruno said:
I'd recommend a separate mailing list (to provide focus) and a
JIRA,
perhaps some place to put
Daniel said:
> On 02/04/2019 11.29, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> > On 02/04/2019 11.26, Joan Touzet wrote:
> >> Trying to cut through the bikeshedding:
> >>
> >> Daniel Gruno said:
> >>> I'd recommend a separate mailing list (to provide focus) and a
> >>> JIRA,
> >>> perhaps some place to put
On 02/04/2019 11.29, Daniel Gruno wrote:
On 02/04/2019 11.26, Joan Touzet wrote:
Trying to cut through the bikeshedding:
Daniel Gruno said:
I'd recommend a separate mailing list (to provide focus) and a JIRA,
perhaps some place to put documents (either within the comdev svn
area,
or
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 5:39 PM Griselda Cuevas wrote:
> ...this rationale still treats the effort to embrace the need for a
> Diversity and Inclusion strategy as a proof of concept, expecting it will
> die...
FWIW that's not my angle. I was just trying to keep things simple, and
small reversible
On 02/04/2019 11.26, Joan Touzet wrote:
Trying to cut through the bikeshedding:
Daniel Gruno said:
I'd recommend a separate mailing list (to provide focus) and a JIRA,
perhaps some place to put documents (either within the comdev svn
area,
or somewhere else if spun off), and then...just get
> On Apr 2, 2019, at 12:11 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
>
> The specific organizational structure does indeed seem like a moot topic.
> What matters is that wherever this take place, the group is given *space and
> freedom* to get some work done. I'd be fine with it being within ComDev, I'd
>
Trying to cut through the bikeshedding:
Daniel Gruno said:
> I'd recommend a separate mailing list (to provide focus) and a JIRA,
> perhaps some place to put documents (either within the comdev svn
> area,
> or somewhere else if spun off), and then...just get to work :)
This is what Griselda
what I liked about Mark's proposal for a VP D is that it sets a very
clear top-down message that the Board is taking this matter seriously and
that ongoing monthly reports are something we are committing to
I think that is diluted somewhat in both intent and impact if this is
"relegated" to a
On 02/04/2019 10.57, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I don't think anyone expects it to die, but rather that D be one of
the core aspects of community development and not an effort,
in and of itself. If it reaches critical mass and warrants being
spun out (due to clear division of tasks between D and
Ah. Ok. That's fair. I retract my comment.
I was seeing going the full top-level committee thing as being a
bureaucratic stumbling block, and not in this light. I have no strong
preference one way or the other and merely wanted to remove obstacles.
Your reasoning is compelling and right. Go for
I don't think anyone expects it to die, but rather that D be one of
the core aspects of community development and not an effort,
in and of itself. If it reaches critical mass and warrants being
spun out (due to clear division of tasks between D and ComDev)
then I think everyone would support that.
Top-post:
Couldn’t this be made a President’s committee now and the board can chat about
it elsewhere until the next board meeting in a few weeks? The board could even
defer until there are Policy recommendations.
(I’m not excited about reading yet another passionate Jim/Sam debate about
On 4/2/2019 8:12 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
...
It's just that the comdev PMC is responsible for oversight and
reporting on those new initiatives, and it keeps things simple for
now.
That is exactly what troubles me about making the new initiative part of
ComDev.
There seems to me to be
I agree with Sam that if we do not formalize this as a committee it will
die.
I understand and acknowledge the reasons why this being part of ComDev
makes sense: simplicity and agility to get off the ground.
However, this rationale still treats the effort to embrace the need for a
Diversity and
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 4:57 PM Sam Ruby wrote:
> ...My feeling is that it will die here...
IIUC what's been proposed so far is a new mailing list and issue tracker.
Both can very well be owned by comdev and that shouldn't limit
progress in any way.
It's just that the comdev PMC is responsible
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 10:48 AM Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:53 PM Rich Bowen wrote:
> > ...In the spirit of small reversible steps, starting as a ComDev
> > initiative, and then, if needed, graduating to its own entity later?...
>
> Good point, that's what I was
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:53 PM Rich Bowen wrote:
> ...In the spirit of small reversible steps, starting as a ComDev
> initiative, and then, if needed, graduating to its own entity later?...
Good point, that's what I was trying to say, but better said ;-)
-Bertrand
> On Apr 2, 2019, at 9:53 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/2/19 7:05 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Does it need to be its own entity? Why can't this be a task/effort under
>> ComDev's control/charter? It certainly seems to fit under the
>> concept of comdev and the people are already here...
On 4/2/19 7:05 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Does it need to be its own entity? Why can't this be a task/effort under
> ComDev's control/charter? It certainly seems to fit under the
> concept of comdev and the people are already here...
In the spirit of small reversible steps, starting as a
Hi Sam,
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 1:25 PM Sam Ruby wrote:
> ...My recommendation at this time is that it becomes a committee,..
> There are early talks about this group having a budget and hiring a
> vendor. The organizational structure chosen should be one that
> enables that...
Ok, let's wait
IMO, this sounds like a cmmt that will defining and implementing
policy... which is a board prerogative. My pref would be, if this
really does need to be outside of ComDev, it be a board cmmt
> On Apr 2, 2019, at 7:25 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:32 AM Bertrand Delacretaz
>
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:32 AM Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
>
> We've had problems in the past with lists becoming orphaned after some
> time because they didn't clearly belong to one of our PMCs.
My recommendation at this time is that it becomes a committee,
complete with requirements to produce
Does it need to be its own entity? Why can't this be a task/effort under
ComDev's control/charter? It certainly seems to fit under the
concept of comdev and the people are already here...
> On Apr 1, 2019, at 6:31 PM, Griselda Cuevas wrote:
>
> Another update.
>
> I'm writing the note to
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 12:13 AM Sam Ruby wrote:
> ...What would you like for the name of the list? divers...@apache.org?
> da...@pache.org? d...@apache.org? If you pick a name, you can request
> this yourself...
We've had problems in the past with lists becoming orphaned after some
time
Another update.
I'm writing the note to operati...@apache.org to request the creation of an
entity to support and govern diversity and inclusion work. I've added the
name of everyone who volunteered here initially, with the caveat that I
might have missed someone, so please follow up on the new
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 5:33 PM Griselda Cuevas wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 17:38, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 8:25 PM Griselda Cuevas
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks everyone for the encouragement and recognition.
> > >
> > > I'm happy to work on the Jira board this
On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 17:38, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 8:25 PM Griselda Cuevas
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks everyone for the encouragement and recognition.
> >
> > I'm happy to work on the Jira board this weekend. Can I just start a new
> > one on my personal account and add people
On 3/30/19 10:25 AM, Naomi Slater wrote:
we don't need to get buy-in from everyone. thank God. because it would
never happen. all we need is a critical mass in order to be able to get
work done.
SO. MUCH. THIS.
I didn't read this thread at all this weekend, and this morning am
trying to
thanks so much for this, Mark! this is great! I'm feeling more hopeful than
ever that something really good can come from this!
On Sun 31. Mar 2019 at 21:59, Mark Thomas wrote:
> I asked the D folks at $dayjob for some advice / suggestions and got
> back the following:
>
> 1. Mozilla have been
I asked the D folks at $dayjob for some advice / suggestions and got
back the following:
1. Mozilla have been doing some work in this area. It was suggested we
reach out to them to get the benefit of their experience. Anyone have
any contacts there?
2. Mozilla joined
d that line is like "your points have no
> >> merit, but we'll make changes and drive them, that affect the whole org,
> >> while using meritocracy while saying it is bad at lower levels", and in
> >> this case it is everyone's concern even if they are not wor
>> merit, but we'll make changes and drive them, that affect the whole org,
>> while using meritocracy while saying it is bad at lower levels", and in
>> this case it is everyone's concern even if they are not working on the
>> specific thing you are, because it
d that when people use the word discrimination, 9 times out of
10, #2 is what is meant/implied/inferred.
We might as well argue about the definition of 'meritocracy'... oops.
Bad idea. :)
rg,
> while using meritocracy while saying it is bad at lower levels", and in
> this case it is everyone's concern even if they are not working on the
> specific thing you are, because it impacts the whole/everyone working on
> something at Apache, and is also directly related to my p
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:17 PM Ross Gardler wrote:
> I think the problem is that *I* used the term "positive discrimination". That
> has led to an interpretation of someone elses words through a cloudy lens.
> Before making assumptions about that other persons intent you should listen
> to
Inclusive Communities (was: on
"meritocracy")
Making accommodations.
IMO, 'affirmative action' should be avoided too much political baggage.
> On Mar 30, 2019, at 2:55 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> Let use the term "affi
t
>>>>
>>>
>>> Please don't go there.
>>>
>>
>> JIm, that was directed at Wade, not you.
>>
>
> and my point wasn't "I've done more work than you so I am right". my point
> was "who are you to tell me I don't care about this organization because I
> 'dare' to criticize 'the meritocracy'". which I believe is a perfectly
> reasonable comment in reply to such a preposterous claim
Gotcha! Thx for the clarification.
Cheers!
excuse me for not thinking your imputation
>>>> carries
>>>>> much weight
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please don't go there.
>>>>
>>>
>>> JIm, that was directed at Wade, not you.
>>>
>&g
omi Slater
> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 11:50 AM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on
> "meritocracy")
>
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>>
>> Discrimination, by
; >
> > >
> > > Please don't go there.
> > >
> >
> > JIm, that was directed at Wade, not you.
> >
>
> and my point wasn't "I've done more work than you so I am right". my point
> was "who are you to tell me I don't care about th
Let use the term "affirmative action" from now on...
From: Naomi Slater
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 11:50 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on
"meritocracy")
On Sat,
debates within projects. It’s part of the ethos of a global
community to let the world spin and not have too many messages appearing in the
morning for others on the list.
I’ll support whatever is agreed to on replacing the phrase “meritocracy” and
will help to see that Incubator content is updated
On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 19:23, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> Discrimination, by definition, is unjust, unwarranted or prejudicial.
>
simplistic and incorrect
discrimination, *by definition*, means you discriminate, i.e., tell apart
we discriminate when we determine who "has merit". but most people
point wasn't "I've done more work than you so I am right". my point
was "who are you to tell me I don't care about this organization because I
'dare' to criticize 'the meritocracy'". which I believe is a perfectly
reasonable comment in reply to such a preposterous claim
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:20 PM Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater wrote:
> >
> > I've done a
> > lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your
> > name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation
> carries
> >
> On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:32 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
>
>> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against
>> anyone. But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as
>> you protect my right to help you achieve the
>> right balance in our broader
Inclusive Communities (was: on
"meritocracy")
> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against anyone.
> But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as you
> protect my right to help you achieve the
> right balance in our bro
> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:41 AM, Naomi Slater wrote:
>
> I've done a
> lot of work for Apache and this is the first time I recall seeing your
> name. so I hope you will excuse me for not thinking your imputation carries
> much weight
>
Please don't go there.
For the record, I've done more
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 1:33 PM Eric Covener wrote:
>
> > I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against
> > anyone. But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long
> > as you protect my right to help you achieve the
> > right balance in our broader
> On Mar 30, 2019, at 10:25 AM, Naomi Slater wrote:
>
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 14:33, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
>> I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in
>> from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise,
>>
>
> we don't need to get
lia one has or is attracted to. If your idea
>of what constitutes merit is based on any of these, then
>that's a f'ed up definition of merit. That means it's a
>problem w/ how merit is defined, and not meritocracy per se."
>
> For clarity: this is not a question as to
> I'm not going to (intentionally) actively discriminate for or against anyone.
> But I will protect your right, as an individual, to do so as long as you
> protect my right to help you achieve the
> right balance in our broader communities by stamping out the existence of any
> discrimination
:-)
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
From: Naomi Slater
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 9:54:52 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Cc: Wade Chandler
Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"
my mistake! thanks for clarifying
On Sat, 30 Mar 201
36>
>
>
>
> From: Naomi Slater
> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 9:45 AM
> Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Cc: Wade Chandler
>
>
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> > "this is the last time I will
Thanks for this post, Shane. You share a number of my concerns.
I am absolutely not blind to opposition to some of the things I've
suggested, but I would argue that the thread on the topic has become
so negative and heated that informed discussion isn't useful.
Again I encourage others to listen
You said "this is the last time I will reply to you". I intended to say there
is great honor in doing that.
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
From: Naomi Slater
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"
To: dev@community.ap
___
From: Shane Curcuru
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 8:43:08 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Building and Sustaining Inclusive Communities (was: on "meritocracy")
Joan Touzet wrote on 3/30/19 12:52 AM:
...snip...
> Precisely the point. I'm in favour of this, though
On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Ross Gardler wrote:
> "this is the last time I will reply to you"
>
> Daniel has a sayibg that I hope we can adopt to avoid unproductive debate.
> I apply it here to Naomi: "there is great honor in the email not sent"
>
I don't know why you keep singling *me* out
___
From: Naomi Slater
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 8:00:20 AM
To: Wade Chandler
Cc: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"
On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 15:57, Wade Chandler wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 10:26 Naomi Slater wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>>
Joan Touzet wrote on 3/30/19 12:52 AM:
...snip...
> Precisely the point. I'm in favour of this, though I know others are
> actively against it. I talked about this at length during my
> ApacheCon 2018 talk, proposing options that are well thought-out and
> fair, drawing from a wide variety of
On 30/03/2019 09.57, Wade Chandler wrote:
In another message I ask about a wiki page etc. That might he helpful, and
seems if this issue has been attempted to be addressed for such a long
period of time in the context of Apache, there will be plenty of material
to help us all do more than argue
On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 15:57, Wade Chandler wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 10:26 Naomi Slater wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> We are many things, good and bad. We should not be hypocrites. After
>>> all, isn't that the core problem we are discussing: claiming to be
>>> all about community and then
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 10:26 Naomi Slater wrote:
>
>
>> We are many things, good and bad. We should not be hypocrites. After
>> all, isn't that the core problem we are discussing: claiming to be
>> all about community and then disenfranchising huge swatches of people?
>>
>
> you are doing the
On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 15:33, Wade Chandler wrote:
> "that sucks and is evil, is the cause, that also makes Apache suck"
>
this is the second time you've alluded to vaguely nationalistic-type
rhetoric to, essentially, accuse me of not caring about Apache. I've done a
lot of work for Apache and
feelings in
this; I expressed I see correlation not causation in what is said about
Apache and meritocracy as applied here.
Replace my opinion on the part I feel isn't clear with race or any other
physical or mental attribute for a mental experiment.
This also reenforces some of
On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 14:33, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I would ask that this goes both ways... I think in order to get buy-in
> from everyone, instead of those who may not agree with some premise,
>
we don't need to get buy-in from everyone. thank God. because it would
never happen. all we need
tion of merit. That means it's a
problem w/ how merit is defined, and not meritocracy per se."
For clarity: this is not a question as to whether the statement is
correct or whether the intent is correct. This is a question as to
whether you feel that would make this hypothetical woman feel m
> On Mar 30, 2019, at 1:21 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> I ask that everyone reading this far take a moment to think the above
> through. It means the issues that cause us to have poor diversity are mostly
> invisible to us. Therefore we assume the problem doesn't exist or isn't as
> severe
On Sat 30. Mar 2019 at 07:02, Wade Chandler wrote:
>
> But, I'm sure
> you'll have a good D initiative if you continue to marginalize people
> like you did there; treat others as insignificant or peripheral.
>
"marginalize"
*Inigo Montoya voice* you keep using that word. I do not think it means
Much of your response was negative in many ways. You're talking about D
initiatives, and at the same time stating "it's" a big deal, and we're
moving forward, and you're on the sidelines; the President said so. Good
campaigns sell the message, and have a strategy to touch the problem, not
shove
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 9:52 PM Joan Touzet wrote:
> "Wade Chandler" wrote:
> > On one hand an organization “can” actively keep
> > people out based on personal attributes; intentional negative & bad;
> > don’t see this here; if you do, please give direct links; most will
> > certainly see that
o better. A good first step is to accept
that there is a problem and ask how we can contribute to fixing it rather than
spending time denying it exists.
Ross
From: Wade Chandler
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 8:35 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: on &q
"Wade Chandler" wrote:
> On one hand an organization “can” actively keep
> people out based on personal attributes; intentional negative & bad;
> don’t see this here; if you do, please give direct links; most will
> certainly see that the same.
Naming and shaming in a public forum isn't a good
> On Mar 28, 2019, at 8:34 AM, Naomi Slater wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 at 13:14, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>>
>>> but in practice, this isn't true. and our committer demographics
>>> demonstrate this
>>
>> Then those PMCs have a f'ed up definition and measure of merit.
>>
>
> but this
ra-contact
From: Sam Ruby
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 5:38 PM
To: Apache Community Dev
Subject: Re: on "meritocracy"
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 8:25 PM Griselda Cuevas wrote:
>
> Thanks everyone for the encouragement and recognition.
>
> I'm happy to work on
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 8:25 PM Griselda Cuevas wrote:
>
> Thanks everyone for the encouragement and recognition.
>
> I'm happy to work on the Jira board this weekend. Can I just start a new
> one on my personal account and add people to it? or does someone need to
> create it under an Apache
Thanks everyone for the encouragement and recognition.
I'm happy to work on the Jira board this weekend. Can I just start a new
one on my personal account and add people to it? or does someone need to
create it under an Apache account? - If the later, can someone create it
and give me admin
I don't find this off-topic. I am grateful for this profile of Drupal,
which I otherwise would not have been exposed to. Thanks Justin!
I want to bring the main section headers and key items (curated by me) of
the Drupal article on list for ease of reading and archival. Apologies for
redundancy
Hi Griselda,
I was thinking along similar lines: measuring where we are, setting goals,
making policy, putting together a team to make it happen.
I love your enthusiasm and hope we can actually create something great from
your ideas. Just as we recognized the value in a fund-raising group,
Hi,
Slightly off topic but relevant. One think we could do is look at other
foundations and communities and see what they have done that has worked for
them. I come across this interesting artifice this morning [1]. Note it
includes the steps that community took to build a diverse community,
+0.999 (I think this is a great idea, and I'd love to be a part of it,
contribute with my insights from the various under-represented
categories I fall into and mistakes I've learned over the past years,
but unsure how much time I can devote at present).
It will be an interesting journey, and
Sign me up as well. I assume there will be some announcement of the mailing
list or jira board here?
Interested in observing where ASF goes on the meritocracy thread,
interested in actively contributing where I can on diversity efforts.
Kenn
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 10:57 Bertrand Delacretaz
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 6:13 PM Joan Touzet wrote:
> ...I think Bertrand here has the
> lead since he's working on the website refresh
Not really, I helped update a small part of apache.org for the 20th
anniversary but that's it.
However, if we can come to a consensus about that needs
agreed with Joan
I would like to be a part of the "meritocracy" conversation as it moves
under Bertrand's initiative. where do I sign up for that?
I would also like to contribute to the D work/initiative/committee
Sam said:
"I'm impressed with the detail, and with the speed
> TL;DR: identify a list of tangible deliverables, and I'll help you
> make it happen.
In the interest of not losing sight of the meritocracy debate, along
with the D work (which I'm happy to engage on, someone sign me up),
we need to actually solve the original "meritocracy" pro
1 - 100 of 193 matches
Mail list logo
