Thanks for the feedback, Will! I agree with the approach you outlined.
Thanks for being so involved in the process! Let’s chat with Giles once he’s back to see if we can get your questions answered. > On Mar 31, 2018, at 10:14 PM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> wrote: > > In the past the committee was chosen as a relatively small group in order > to make it easier to manage feedback. In order to make it fair to everyone > in the community, I would suggest that instead of doing it with a small > group, we do it out in the open on a scheduled call. > > We will have to get a list of the talks that are CloudStack specific from > ApacheCon, but that should be possible. > > Once we have the talks selected, then a smaller number of us can work on > setting up the actual ordering and the details. > > I have been quite involved so far. Giles and I have been organizing the > sponsors, website and dealing with ApacheCon so far. Obviously, Mike is > also working on this as well. > > I think we are headed in the right direction on this. > > Cheers, > > Will > > On Mar 31, 2018 11:49 PM, "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> > wrote: > > Hi Ron, > > I am definitely open to working this however makes the most sense. > > It looks like Will’s e-mail indicates that the process I suggested has been > followed in the past (which is how I recall, as well). > > Let’s make sure I understood Will correctly. > > Will – Are you, in fact, indicating that what I was suggesting is how we > have reviewed the CFP in the past? If so, are you able to address Ron’s > concerns? > > Also, Will – I am not sure about a hackathon. Let’s chat with Giles once > he’s back from vacation since he’s been the most involved with organizing > the CloudStack track within ApacheCon. > > Thanks! > > Mike > > > On 3/31/18, 9:00 PM, "Ron Wheeler" <rwhee...@artifact-software.com> wrote: > > I am not sure about your concern in that case. > I am not sure why people not interested in Cloudstack would volunteer as > reviewers and want to pick bad presentations. > > I would be more worried that there are not enough good presentations > proposed rather than some meritorious presentation will get rejected due > to "outsiders" voting it down in favour of less useful presentations. > > It may be tricky to get balance if that means taking "bad" proposals > that can not be fixed that cover topics that are in areas that are not > otherwise covered at the expense of great presentations that are in > areas with many choices. > > We should wait to see how many presentations have to be rejected and the > number of reviewers before getting too exercised over the loyalty of > reviewers. > > Getting more reviewers is likely the most effective way to see that a > wider range of topics is covered. > > Ron > >> On 31/03/2018 7:15 PM, Tutkowski, Mike wrote: >> Hi Ron, >> >> From what I understand, the CloudStack proposals will be mixed in > with all of the ApacheCon proposals. >> >> In the past when I’ve participated in these CloudStack panels to > review proposals, we had to compare each proposal against the others to > arrive at a balance of topics (i.e. not all networking focused, not all > XenServer focused, etc.) and to suggest improvements for proposals that we > did not accept for other reasons. >> >> From what I understand (but Giles can comment further on this), we > have a track at ApacheCon and will need to fill it with X number of > presentations. To do this, it seems like a CloudStack-focused panel would > be a good approach, but I am definitely open to another approach. We don’t > want to exclude anyone (in or out of the CloudStack Community) who might > like to provide input. Anyone who is interested would, of course, be free > to join us in combing through the proposals. >> >> We don’t need to get started on this right away. The CFP just closed > yesterday. Let’s wait for feedback from Giles (who is currently on > vacation) and go from there. >> >> Thanks! >> Mike >> >> On 3/31/18, 6:59 AM, "Ron Wheeler" <rwhee...@artifact-software.com> > wrote: >> >> Is this a real concern? >> Why would a large number of Apache contributors who are not > interested >> in Cloudstack (enough to outvote those "part of the Cloudstack >> community") get involved as reviewers >> >> Reviewing involves some commitment of time so I am hard pressed > to guess >> why some Apache contributor would volunteer to do the work in > order to >> veto a presentation that they have not yet seen or have no > interest in >> seeing. >> >> Are we guaranteed a fixed number of hours of presentations or is > the >> review process part of the allocation of overall time? >> >> On what basis can some group veto a presentation? >> That would seem to be a very strong action and I would hope that > it >> requires a strong reason. >> >> OTOH if a large??? number of Apache contributors (regardless of > their >> affiliation) say that a presentation has serious issues or very > limited >> interest, that would seem to be a red flag that the presentation >> requires improvement or needs to be dropped in favour of another >> Cloudstack presentation, if it can not be fixed. >> >> We should also be aware that this is an opportunity to "market" >> Cloudstack to the broader Apache community. >> Outside reviewers might have valuable input into how > presentations can >> attract new adopters or be clearer to the broader DevOps > community. >> We also need to remember that we do have an active community and > other >> opportunities during the year to present presentations that do > not get >> selected for this conference. >> >> If their is a real fear that a lot of "outsiders" are going to > disrupt >> the review process, a more reasonable response would seem to be > to get >> more reviewers from the community. >> >> I have volunteered already. >> >> Ron >> >>> On 30/03/2018 11:11 PM, Tutkowski, Mike wrote: >>> Hi Rafael, >>> >>> It’s a little bit tricky in our particular situation. Allow me > to explain: >>> >>> As you are likely aware, the CloudStack Collaboration > Conference will be held as a track in the larger ApacheCon conference in > Montreal this coming September. >>> >>> It is true, as you say, that anyone who wishes to do so can > contribute to reviewing the CFP for ApacheCon. >>> >>> What is a bit of a concern, however, is that we might get > certain CloudStack CFP proposals vetoed by people who are not, per se, a > part of our community. >>> >>> That being the case, I have contacted the organizers for > ApacheCon to see if there is some way we can section off the CloudStack CFP > from the larger ApacheCon CFP for review purposes. >>> >>> Assuming we can do this, the panel that I am proposing here > would handle this review task. >>> >>> I hope that helps clarify the situation. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Mike >>> >>> On 3/30/18, 8:38 AM, "Rafael Weingärtner" < > rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Are we going to have a separated review process? >>> >>> I thought anybody could go here [1] and apply for a > reviewer position and >>> start reviewing. Well, that is what I did. I have already > reviewed some >>> CloudStack proposals (of course I did not review mines). > After asking to >>> review presentations, Rich has giving me access to the > system. I thought >>> everybody interest in helping was going to do the same. >>> >>> [1] > https://cfp.apachecon.com/conference.html?apachecon-north-america-2018 >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 4:05 AM, Swen - swen.io < > m...@swen.io> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Mike, >>>> >>>> congrats! >>>> >>>> I can help sort through presentations. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Swen >>>> >>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>>> Von: Tutkowski, Mike [mailto:mike.tutkow...@netapp.com] >>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. März 2018 21:40 >>>> An: d...@cloudstack.apache.org; > users@cloudstack.apache.org >>>> Betreff: Committee to Sort through CCC Presentation > Submissions >>>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> As you may be aware, this coming September in Montreal, > the CloudStack >>>> Community will be hosting the CloudStack Collaboration > Conference: >>>> >>>> http://ca.cloudstackcollab.org/ >>>> >>>> Even though the event is six months away, we are on a > tight schedule with >>>> regards to the Call For Participation (CFP): >>>> >>>> https://www.apachecon.com/acna18/schedule.html >>>> >>>> If you are interested in submitting a talk, please do > so before March 30th. >>>> >>>> That being said, as usual, we will have need of a small > committee to sort >>>> through these presentation submissions. >>>> >>>> If you are interested in helping out in this process, > please reply to this >>>> message. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Rafael Weingärtner >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Ron Wheeler >> President >> Artifact Software Inc >> email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com >> skype: ronaldmwheeler >> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >> >> >> > > -- > Ron Wheeler > President > Artifact Software Inc > email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > skype: ronaldmwheeler > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
