On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org> wrote: > On 20 October 2012 18:10, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org> wrote: >> > Hmm, "cloudstack-extras" seems to me like something that the Apache >> > CloudStack project is providing. I was hoping for Shane's input on this, >> > which is why I didn't say anything after looping him in. >> >> This sat for over a week with nary a comment. > > > I volunteer my time to this project. Any contributions I make are on my own > time. My employer does not pay me to contribute. CloudStack is > an extremely high traffic project and I am doing the best I can to > contribute to it.
Let me say that I appreciate your contributions - much of our readiness to release is because of your tireless efforts to point out our problems - please don't take my frustration as frustration with all of your contributions, or even that I disagree with you. > > >> I don't mean to vent my >> frustration, but if you thought there was a problem why not say >> something > > > I did. Forgive me for disagreeing - but there was nothing remotely negative about your response. http://markmail.org/message/qs5wt2ucjjdj4tfp You said you were looping in someone else - expanding the audience, not a bad thing - there was no indication that you thought that. One of the things you indicated was problematic in your earlier mail was the account name github.com/cloudstack - which was all I was attempting to solve at this time. The rest still remain issues - but I will discuss those in a bit in a followup to your earlier email. > > I CCed Shane (our VP of Brand Management) because I wanted his input. I > brought up the concern previously on the mailing list, and nothing much > seemed to happen. This time, I thought I would loop Shane in to clarify any > questions. I guess he was busy too. > > >> How long should I have waited? > > > I don't know. But following up was another option. Sometimes emails get > lost in the noise. After 6 days you posted a note to say you were going to > go ahead and name the repos. You assumed lazy consensus, but I think my > previous notes to the list should have been indication enough that we had > not established consensus. This particular action (renaming the account) was taken in response to your referenced email wherein you complained about the name. Your note was not a -1 (and had it been, per http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#management you should have pointed out what the problems were with the account name choice or offered an alternative. Your email in response to my proposal of cloudstack-extras did neither of those, and no one from trademarks@ responded negatively either. How is one not supposed to assume that there is lazy consensus to change the name to cloudstack-extras out of that?) How is the account name cloudstack-extras not a nominative use of the term CloudStack and pointing out that it is 'extra' the definition of which means outside or in addition to. With the exception of the CloudStack repo contained therein, all of the included code is something outside of our in addition to CloudStack. Every use of the word CloudStack is not a trademark violation - even if it is in software. > > >> I could have left this as >> github.com/cloudstack and not spent the time and energy to make the >> move, blog about it, notify the many people who this move affects etc. >> > > This isn't really an option, as I have outlined before. You are missing my point, I want the problem solved. I want folks to realize that CloudStack is at the ASF and for their to be no brand confusion. What I don't want to do is waste my time when I propose, and then try and fix some of the problems you outline. I am willing to do the work to get this done. > > >> While I seek to make sure we do what is best for the project, it's >> exhausting to try and comply with the demands, only to propose things, >> get zero feedback, make the changes, publicize the changes, and then >> days later get feedback that it isn't acceptable. > > > This is an unfair characterisation of my involvement. I have not made any > "demands" of you. I gave repeated, and detailed feedback on this issue. But > this seems to have been ignored. > Not at all - this was actually an attempt to fix one of the github issues. It wasn't an attempt to fix them all - it was an attempt to change the name. In followup to that mail - I sent a mail to the list saying I was going to do the work to change the name, I tossed out a proposal and asked if there were any objections to the name. The only email in response was one of you indicating you were copying trademarks@ - otherwise nothing negative. > >> To that end, I've >> made you an admin on that github project - please take whatever action >> suits you. >> > > This is a disappointing response. Of course, I will take no such action. > Despite the fact that I am not prepared to unilaterally change something as > important as this Github organisation without all the facts, my aim is to > help Apache CloudStack adjust to Apache. If the response to my guidance is > "oh well, you better fix it then" then I am obviously doing a very poor job. My response is this: I tried to remedy something you saw as a problem (the github account name). I proposed a solution on list. I waited a week. I saw no negative response to the name. I changed it. Two days after I changed it you come back saying that is still a problem, but not suggesting any alternatives for identifying a collection of repos for things that are useful to CloudStack. I don't have any more suggestions to remedy this. I do wish to empower you as a member and participant of this community, who is doing work in this community, to not be blocked in implementing a solution. > > >> > There are still several problems with this page: >> > >> > - The "cloudstack-extras" name seems confusing, as stated above. The >> > Apache extras is fine, because we are providing it. But Apache has no >> > oversight for this repository, so it should clearly indicate it's >> > provenance. (i.e. Citrix tools for CloudStack — which would, >> incidentally, >> > be a much better name. Perhaps change it to "Citrix"?) >> >> We toyed with the idea of Citrix - and I can probably jump through the >> hoops for that as well, but Citrix would also have issues with this, >> as virtually none of the software contained therein belongs to Citrix, >> nor do they really have control over it. This is largely code without >> a single unifying owner. The only commonality is that it is focused on >> CloudStack. Most of the items contained therein have been developed by >> people working on and around cloudstack. For instance, Edmunds.com, >> Opscode, and Enstratus employees wrote knife-cloudstack with no Citrix >> contributions whatsoever. >> > > I don't know what to suggest then. Perhaps "cloudstack-extras" is not such > a big problem. I will defer to Shane, who has way more experience with this > than I do. This is essentially where I am at - I have no idea for a better name that doesn't involve the word cloudstack for identifying this. The remaining issues still do exist, and they still need to be solved, and eventually we will.
