I'll add in here as someone who was acting as PM on a lot of cross-team projects at my last few gigs, this is a good example of coordination improving the process. If people are unwilling to change their opinions or even express them, that is an issue. Timing of release/progress is important and pushing back on whether changes are necessary is valid too.
Being aware that Marketing contributions are valid/valuable community contributions is a key to the success of a project. Seems like there were some white spaces in what was known but this was a good resolution for all. Is there some update to public documentation that can be put out there to explain the coordination and timing w/ the Marketing team? Want to make sure this isn't only included in a single email chain but is posted up for all to review and see because it's important info. On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 2:38 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the clarification Melissa. It’s interesting to see how open > source marketing and timing differs from “traditional”. > > Looks like I was mistaken about coordination implications of delay. Sorry > for instigating needless conflict. > > > On Jul 17, 2020, at 5:11 PM, Mick Semb Wever <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> > >> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed). Everyone who has > >> tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC members are considered > >> binding. A vote passes if there are at least three binding +1s and no > -1s. > >> > > > > > > Vote closed/cancelled, am re-cutting it… > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- Scott Hirleman [email protected]
