Here is the mail thread where we discussed this. It also has agreement that we will discuss things on mailing list and no decision till it happens on mailing list. Hope this clears things up when you read the thread.
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa54420a43671c00392978f2b0920bc6926ca9ba1e61a486ad39fb21%40%3Cdev.cassandra.apache.org%3E On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 3:16 AM Benedict Elliott Smith <bened...@apache.org> wrote: > I recall this being discussed at ApacheCon, and I recall the idea seemed > very much for a semi-formal regular project meeting, in which project > business would be discussed on a pre-agreed agenda. Some ground rules were > even suggested at ApacheCon, such as ensuring the meetings occur in > rotating timezones, that the agenda is proposed and voted upon on-list in > advance, etc. > > Nothing is a decision until it happens on-list, and in this case the date, > time, agenda and process should be a proposal, not something that is > predetermined. > > A great comparison is the CEP proposal, which was discussed at ApacheCon, > brought on-list, codified, modified and voted on. > > It's very easy for people who have resources at their disposal to start to > behave as though they have decision-making power, because usually things > happen in the way that they propose. This happens even with the best of > intentions, and I have never once implied or suspected bad intentions. > > > > > On 11/01/2020, 04:24, "Jeff Jirsa" <jji...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This will be rambling as I’m typing on my phone while watching The > Office and I’m not going to proofread, but: > > PMC votes on releases, and code policies, and trademarks, and things > of that nature. While the link suggests PMCs *can* sponsor meetings, > nothing should preclude anyone from meeting to talk about the database - > there are countless cassandra meetups around and we never try to police > those (and we shouldn’t start), as long as they’re not pretending to be > speaking on behalf of the project. > > A couple non-committer contributors deciding to hop on a video call > and encourage other contributors to attend seems both harmless to the > project and something that can help build awareness and bring attention to > some of the otherwise invisible work that’s happening. > > It’s not on behalf of the project PMC, this thread has made that > clear, but I think there’s value here, even if anything discussed or > proposed on any hypothetical call has no standing and wouldn’t represent > the PMC or the project. Having folks who care about the database talk about > the community, even if they’re not committers, doesn’t seem all that > damaging to me, as long as they’re not violating trademark to promote it or > somehow misrepresenting the nature of the call. > > I get the concern about implicit control of the project and how that > can devolve over time despite good intentions. > > As with the long threads in 2015/2016, I think we should be sure not > to overreact out of fear, and should assume good intent. > > Given the concern, I also think folks trying to build community should > make a point of over communicating to the dev list. > > Hugs and kisses friends, > - Jeff > > > > > On Jan 10, 2020, at 6:05 PM, Benedict Elliott Smith < > bened...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > To be clear, as it seems like I'm being very negative here, I'm > really pleased to see DataStax suddenly increase their participation, even > if currently it's limited to administrative activities. But let's try > really hard to do things in the right way. > > > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/governance/pmcs.html#meetings > > > > Community and meetings are explicitly within the intended purview of > the PMC. The Cassandra PMC ordinarily implicitly devolves decision-making > to the dev list, so a lack of formal role is no impediment to participation > _here on the devlist_ but making decisions off-list amongst a cohort > lacking _any_ formal members of the community is a particularly bad look > IMO, and the kind of indifference to "The Apache Way" that lead to the > fallout with DataStax many moons ago. > > > > In this case, Patrick said "we've decided we're running a > contributor meeting on this date" which starts to look like an attempt - > however unintentional - to make decisions about community and collaboration > _for_ the project. > > > > Instead, IMO, presenting a clear proposal to the community about how > this could happen, giving it due time to respond and consider (and probably > mostly express gratitude!) is the right way to do it. It might lead to > tweaks, it might lead to minor preconditions about process, it might lead > to nothing. But that's how these kinds of things should happen, even > ignoring the ASF stuff, if only out of politeness. > > > > > > On 11/01/2020, 01:52, "J. D. Jordan" <jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Isn’t doing such things the way people who are not writing code > become part of a project? By offering their time to do things that benefit > the project? > > > > Why does anyone “with a formal role” need to agree that Patrick is > allowed to use his time to try and get some people together to discuss > contributing? > > > > -Jeremiah Jordan > > Person with no formal role in the Apache Cassandra project. > > > >>>> On Jan 10, 2020, at 7:44 PM, Benedict Elliott Smith < > bened...@apache.org> wrote: > >> This is also great. But it's a bit of a weird look to have two > people, neither of whom have formal roles on the project, making decisions > like this without the involvement of the community. I'm sure everyone will > be supportive, but it would help to democratise the decision-making. > >> On 11/01/2020, 01:39, "Patrick McFadin" <pmcfa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Scott and I had a talk this week and we are starting the contributor > >> meetings on 1/22 as we talked about at NGCC. (Yeah that was back in > >> September) Stay tuned for the details and agenda in the project > confluence > >> page. > >> Patrick > >>>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 3:21 PM Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 3:19 PM Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 2:35 PM Benedict Elliott Smith < > >>>> bened...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>>> Yes, I also miss those fortnightly (or monthly) summaries that > Jeff > >>>>> used to do. They were very useful "glue" in the community. I > imagine > >>> they'd > >>>>> also make writing the board report easier. > >>>>> +1, those were great > >>>> I'll try to either do more of these, or nudge someone else into > doing > >>> them > >>>> from time to time. > >>> (I meant ^ if Josh doesnt volunteer. Would love to have Josh do > them if > >>> he's got time). > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > >
