You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@diversity.apache.org by Naomi Slater <ns...@apache.org> on 2019/06/10 20:48:47 UTC
Concerns about process
hey folks,
two things that have happened in the past couple of days that concern me
the first is that a board report was prepared and sent to the board by the
Chair without any input from the committee. (Gris acknowledged this a
separate follow-up email she sent to dev@diversity)
SIDE NOTE: I am subscribed to board@ but I didn't receive the original copy
of the board report. so I am wondering which list it was sent to. perhaps I
have a misconfigured email client?
ANOTHER SIDE NOTE: it is generally a good idea to copy dev@ when sending
the report to board@. that way, there is no need to send an additional
followup notification to dev@diversity
my second concern is that I learned about a proposed D&I budget request
only because Jim copied in the private@diversity list on a thread that
seems to have been started on opperations@ (to which I am not subscribed)
we had a brainstorming thread about our budget request last month, but to
the best of my knowledge, there has been no chance for the committee to
work on the actual proposal that was sent. I have seen no emails about it,
no draft text, no requests for review, etc
as far PMCs are concerned, Chairs (who also serve as the VP of the
respective project) are not "project leaders". they function as an elected
representative of the committee to the board and are responsible for
foundation-level admin but they do not hold any special decision-making
power above-and-beyond a regular committee member
cf. https://couchdb.apache.org/bylaws.html#chair
we are not a PMC, though. so I am not sure how things are meant to operate
with this committee. (this is one of the reasons I suggested that we draft
some bylaws that would clarify this sort of thing)
I think that we should operate the way that a standard PMC does. that is,
decisions are made on-list, *by the committee*, and the Chair (i.e., VP
D&I) has the primary function of interfacing with the board
apologies, Gris, if we're on the same page and these were both just
procedural oversights!! most new committees have teething troubles and
there's no reason we should be any different. but I figure this is an
important issue and one we should get clarity on as early as possible
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <km...@apache.org>.
Well when I started as VP Fundraising, there was little committee functions
per se so I recruited people to it, created the private mailing list,
continued & expanded meetings with Virtual to include more people, created
annual goals, created sponsor tracking spreadsheets, created agendas /
minutes for committee meetings, setup a standing meeting and used g suite
to draft my reports.
All my reports: board, quarterly and yearly, I drafted in g suite in
advance so review, comments and additions were encouraged before they were
submitted.
I also put proposals on drive for creation as well for collaboration.
I did the reports as running reports so one file with a the reports, new
newest on top.
I used a public team drive and a private team drive as there is a lot more
for fundraising that requires privacy than most any place at the foundation.
And any reports submitted would be ccd to a list.
There had been complaints before that fundraising lacked transparency and I
think this laid a good foundation.
IMO Gris just needs a few months to go through the motions because she's
not familiar with Apache processes.
Fundraising uses a lot of g suite tooling which I think was the right tool
chosen by the people doing the work. Gris right now is exploring our tools
available be it Jira or confluence or G suite or o365. I am happy to
advise her on what is best and how things work to the best of my
capabilities.
HTH, KAM
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 17:15 Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> Kevin, when you were VP Fundraising, what process did you follow?
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 5:01 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for helping guide Gris. She's just learning about how things
> > work at the ASF.
> >
> > On 6/10/2019 4:48 PM, Naomi Slater wrote:
> > > hey folks,
> > >
> > > two things that have happened in the past couple of days that concern
> me
> > >
> > > the first is that a board report was prepared and sent to the board by
> > the
> > > Chair without any input from the committee. (Gris acknowledged this a
> > > separate follow-up email she sent to dev@diversity)
> > >
> > > SIDE NOTE: I am subscribed to board@ but I didn't receive the original
> > copy
> > > of the board report. so I am wondering which list it was sent to.
> > perhaps I
> > > have a misconfigured email client?
> > >
> > > ANOTHER SIDE NOTE: it is generally a good idea to copy dev@ when
> sending
> > > the report to board@. that way, there is no need to send an additional
> > > followup notification to dev@diversity
> > >
> > > my second concern is that I learned about a proposed D&I budget request
> > > only because Jim copied in the private@diversity list on a thread that
> > > seems to have been started on opperations@ (to which I am not
> > subscribed)
> > >
> > > we had a brainstorming thread about our budget request last month, but
> to
> > > the best of my knowledge, there has been no chance for the committee to
> > > work on the actual proposal that was sent. I have seen no emails about
> > it,
> > > no draft text, no requests for review, etc
> > >
> > > as far PMCs are concerned, Chairs (who also serve as the VP of the
> > > respective project) are not "project leaders". they function as an
> > elected
> > > representative of the committee to the board and are responsible for
> > > foundation-level admin but they do not hold any special decision-making
> > > power above-and-beyond a regular committee member
> > >
> > > cf. https://couchdb.apache.org/bylaws.html#chair
> > >
> > > we are not a PMC, though. so I am not sure how things are meant to
> > operate
> > > with this committee. (this is one of the reasons I suggested that we
> > draft
> > > some bylaws that would clarify this sort of thing)
> > >
> > > I think that we should operate the way that a standard PMC does. that
> is,
> > > decisions are made on-list, *by the committee*, and the Chair (i.e., VP
> > > D&I) has the primary function of interfacing with the board
> > >
> > > apologies, Gris, if we're on the same page and these were both just
> > > procedural oversights!! most new committees have teething troubles and
> > > there's no reason we should be any different. but I figure this is an
> > > important issue and one we should get clarity on as early as possible
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Kevin A. McGrail
> > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> >
> >
>
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
Kevin, when you were VP Fundraising, what process did you follow?
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 5:01 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for helping guide Gris. She's just learning about how things
> work at the ASF.
>
> On 6/10/2019 4:48 PM, Naomi Slater wrote:
> > hey folks,
> >
> > two things that have happened in the past couple of days that concern me
> >
> > the first is that a board report was prepared and sent to the board by
> the
> > Chair without any input from the committee. (Gris acknowledged this a
> > separate follow-up email she sent to dev@diversity)
> >
> > SIDE NOTE: I am subscribed to board@ but I didn't receive the original
> copy
> > of the board report. so I am wondering which list it was sent to.
> perhaps I
> > have a misconfigured email client?
> >
> > ANOTHER SIDE NOTE: it is generally a good idea to copy dev@ when sending
> > the report to board@. that way, there is no need to send an additional
> > followup notification to dev@diversity
> >
> > my second concern is that I learned about a proposed D&I budget request
> > only because Jim copied in the private@diversity list on a thread that
> > seems to have been started on opperations@ (to which I am not
> subscribed)
> >
> > we had a brainstorming thread about our budget request last month, but to
> > the best of my knowledge, there has been no chance for the committee to
> > work on the actual proposal that was sent. I have seen no emails about
> it,
> > no draft text, no requests for review, etc
> >
> > as far PMCs are concerned, Chairs (who also serve as the VP of the
> > respective project) are not "project leaders". they function as an
> elected
> > representative of the committee to the board and are responsible for
> > foundation-level admin but they do not hold any special decision-making
> > power above-and-beyond a regular committee member
> >
> > cf. https://couchdb.apache.org/bylaws.html#chair
> >
> > we are not a PMC, though. so I am not sure how things are meant to
> operate
> > with this committee. (this is one of the reasons I suggested that we
> draft
> > some bylaws that would clarify this sort of thing)
> >
> > I think that we should operate the way that a standard PMC does. that is,
> > decisions are made on-list, *by the committee*, and the Chair (i.e., VP
> > D&I) has the primary function of interfacing with the board
> >
> > apologies, Gris, if we're on the same page and these were both just
> > procedural oversights!! most new committees have teething troubles and
> > there's no reason we should be any different. but I figure this is an
> > important issue and one we should get clarity on as early as possible
> >
>
> --
> Kevin A. McGrail
> Member, Apache Software Foundation
> Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
>
>
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
As someone said there’s no one way of doing it, it varies from the chair just submitting what the PMC’s members write to the chair doing all or most of the work.
My only suggestion is that 48h may be a little short time to review, for releases we generally allow 72h hours. Some of the project I'm involved in have the board report up for a week or two before is it submitted.
The incubator report has been done on the wiki and that seems to work well, but give a 100’s of people have to be involved, that probably solving a different problem. We were ask last month by the board to move to a markdown format and that seems to have improved it’s readability. Github also supports markdown.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Griselda Cuevas <gr...@google.com.INVALID>.
Hi folks,
I am very happy to see this discussion, it is part of defining ourselves.
Let's decide in how we want to continue with two things:
1) Reports to the president
2) Operational matters
Please vote for 1 & 2 or suggest modifications
------------------------------------------------
1) Reports
I agree 100% with Ross, they should reflect what happened in the list. For
this one I literally just curated it from conversations in the mailing
list, stats from Pony Mail and Jira.
My preference would be that *anyone* from the committee starts the draft 7
days before the board meeting and notifies dev@ with a call for comments.
The call for comments should be open for 48h. Then that same person and I
can work on finalizing the report and I'll send it via SVN and that person
can send to dev@ on the Friday before the meeting (the deadline). I'd like
to suggest we use GitHub***.
2) For operational matters such as the budget
I'd open up a Jira for contributions. I will update that Jira and dev@ with
a final write up of the proposal or the final decision *based on the input
provided*. I personally don't see a need for more comments if input was
considered.
****Why Github? It has a lower entry barrier for new folks to the ASF or
software development in general. There is also more tutorials and in dif.
Languages available.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019, 8:18 PM Ross Gardler
<Ro...@microsoft.com.invalid> wrote:
> I'll repeat what I said earlier...
>
> "That said, in order to build a strong team it would be wise to ensure that
> the team is aware of what is being reported. Being involved in writing the
> report is less important as it should be reflecting what we already see on
> list."
>
> Thus, +1 to Sam's suggestion:
>
> "Nothing is preventing any of you from getting
> started on next month's report today. I'm confident that Gris will
> appreciate the help."
>
> That is, if active folks here consider the board report a collaborative
> effort then make it so.
>
> Ross
>
> ________________________________
> From: Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 3:42 AM
> To: dev@diversity.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Concerns about process
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:03 AM Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > I agree in general, but I'd like to point out that reports can be edited
> > after the fact. Posting a report to the board agenda, doesn't mean that
> > further input isn't welcome from the group.
>
> I'll go further: CTR (commit then review) is not the same as making a
> decision top down. That being said, CTR requires visibility, so some
> tweaks to the process are in order as not everybody here can see the
> board agenda. Gris has already indicated that she will share the
> report earlier next month[1]. To date, I haven't seen any feedback on
> the report itself.
>
> I'd like ask everybody for patience here. Gris is traveling on
> business, and I'm insisting that she prioritize things like budget
> input and ensuring that there was a report. If anyone here disagrees
> with those priorities, then blame me. I don't intend to set direction
> for D&I, but when the committee in general and Gris in particular are
> being pulled in multiple directions, I intend to set priorities. The
> timing for the budget both sucks (in that it essentially coincides
> with the forming of this committee), and is ideal (in that the
> committee doesn't have to wait a half a year or more to make a
> request).
>
> I'll close this email with a suggestion: over the years I've had the
> pleasure of observing a lot of communities within the ASF and how they
> operate. Some develop their reports collaboratively and publicly on
> places like a wiki. Nothing is preventing any of you from getting
> started on next month's report today. I'm confident that Gris will
> appreciate the help. Everybody here should be able to see the
> calendar for board meetings[2]. Board meetings are on Wednesdays, and
> I'm requesting that the report be posted to the agenda by the Friday
> before the meeting. So please have the next board report posted by
> the 12th of July.
>
> > Best,
> > Myrle
>
> [1]
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fs.apache.org%2FlY4K&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7C8107a81cb22c499553e608d6ee5989ce%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636958465672001562&sdata=PTk%2FpkAOpf2H5LuKGfU8rGYlpllOTt0GFSAsWc7ALk8%3D&reserved=0
> [2]
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsvn.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fprivate%2Fcommitters%2Fboard%2Fcalendar.txt&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7C8107a81cb22c499553e608d6ee5989ce%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636958465672001562&sdata=L0BoMOZLzBZ%2FojthH2E0X224rNYdQ4N87FX5dx9v7u8%3D&reserved=0
>
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:25 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <
> bdelacretaz@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 2019/06/10 23:18:02, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> > > > ...Ross has it exactly right. Gris followed the process. As to the
> steps
> > > > before the report is filed... there is (dare I say it) a lot of
> diversity
> > > > in how those reports are developed. That's entirely up to the VP and
> the
> > > > committee...
> > >
> > > Yes, and as a committee member I strongly suggest that we operate like
> a
> > > PMC, where team members are consulted before sending important things
> like
> > > Board reports or budget requests.
> > >
> > > I'm not interested personally in being part of a committee where things
> > > are decided top-down. I understand *in a minority of cases* this is
> needed
> > > to move fast but such cases should be an exception - in my view.
> > >
> > > Gris, please let us know how you see things!
> > >
> > > -Bertrand
> > >
>
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Ross Gardler <Ro...@microsoft.com.INVALID>.
I'll repeat what I said earlier...
"That said, in order to build a strong team it would be wise to ensure that
the team is aware of what is being reported. Being involved in writing the
report is less important as it should be reflecting what we already see on
list."
Thus, +1 to Sam's suggestion:
"Nothing is preventing any of you from getting
started on next month's report today. I'm confident that Gris will
appreciate the help."
That is, if active folks here consider the board report a collaborative effort then make it so.
Ross
________________________________
From: Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 3:42 AM
To: dev@diversity.apache.org
Subject: Re: Concerns about process
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:03 AM Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I agree in general, but I'd like to point out that reports can be edited
> after the fact. Posting a report to the board agenda, doesn't mean that
> further input isn't welcome from the group.
I'll go further: CTR (commit then review) is not the same as making a
decision top down. That being said, CTR requires visibility, so some
tweaks to the process are in order as not everybody here can see the
board agenda. Gris has already indicated that she will share the
report earlier next month[1]. To date, I haven't seen any feedback on
the report itself.
I'd like ask everybody for patience here. Gris is traveling on
business, and I'm insisting that she prioritize things like budget
input and ensuring that there was a report. If anyone here disagrees
with those priorities, then blame me. I don't intend to set direction
for D&I, but when the committee in general and Gris in particular are
being pulled in multiple directions, I intend to set priorities. The
timing for the budget both sucks (in that it essentially coincides
with the forming of this committee), and is ideal (in that the
committee doesn't have to wait a half a year or more to make a
request).
I'll close this email with a suggestion: over the years I've had the
pleasure of observing a lot of communities within the ASF and how they
operate. Some develop their reports collaboratively and publicly on
places like a wiki. Nothing is preventing any of you from getting
started on next month's report today. I'm confident that Gris will
appreciate the help. Everybody here should be able to see the
calendar for board meetings[2]. Board meetings are on Wednesdays, and
I'm requesting that the report be posted to the agenda by the Friday
before the meeting. So please have the next board report posted by
the 12th of July.
> Best,
> Myrle
[1] https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fs.apache.org%2FlY4K&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7C8107a81cb22c499553e608d6ee5989ce%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636958465672001562&sdata=PTk%2FpkAOpf2H5LuKGfU8rGYlpllOTt0GFSAsWc7ALk8%3D&reserved=0
[2] https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsvn.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fprivate%2Fcommitters%2Fboard%2Fcalendar.txt&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7C8107a81cb22c499553e608d6ee5989ce%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636958465672001562&sdata=L0BoMOZLzBZ%2FojthH2E0X224rNYdQ4N87FX5dx9v7u8%3D&reserved=0
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:25 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2019/06/10 23:18:02, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> > > ...Ross has it exactly right. Gris followed the process. As to the steps
> > > before the report is filed... there is (dare I say it) a lot of diversity
> > > in how those reports are developed. That's entirely up to the VP and the
> > > committee...
> >
> > Yes, and as a committee member I strongly suggest that we operate like a
> > PMC, where team members are consulted before sending important things like
> > Board reports or budget requests.
> >
> > I'm not interested personally in being part of a committee where things
> > are decided top-down. I understand *in a minority of cases* this is needed
> > to move fast but such cases should be an exception - in my view.
> >
> > Gris, please let us know how you see things!
> >
> > -Bertrand
> >
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:03 AM Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I agree in general, but I'd like to point out that reports can be edited
> after the fact. Posting a report to the board agenda, doesn't mean that
> further input isn't welcome from the group.
I'll go further: CTR (commit then review) is not the same as making a
decision top down. That being said, CTR requires visibility, so some
tweaks to the process are in order as not everybody here can see the
board agenda. Gris has already indicated that she will share the
report earlier next month[1]. To date, I haven't seen any feedback on
the report itself.
I'd like ask everybody for patience here. Gris is traveling on
business, and I'm insisting that she prioritize things like budget
input and ensuring that there was a report. If anyone here disagrees
with those priorities, then blame me. I don't intend to set direction
for D&I, but when the committee in general and Gris in particular are
being pulled in multiple directions, I intend to set priorities. The
timing for the budget both sucks (in that it essentially coincides
with the forming of this committee), and is ideal (in that the
committee doesn't have to wait a half a year or more to make a
request).
I'll close this email with a suggestion: over the years I've had the
pleasure of observing a lot of communities within the ASF and how they
operate. Some develop their reports collaboratively and publicly on
places like a wiki. Nothing is preventing any of you from getting
started on next month's report today. I'm confident that Gris will
appreciate the help. Everybody here should be able to see the
calendar for board meetings[2]. Board meetings are on Wednesdays, and
I'm requesting that the report be posted to the agenda by the Friday
before the meeting. So please have the next board report posted by
the 12th of July.
> Best,
> Myrle
[1] https://s.apache.org/lY4K
[2] https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/board/calendar.txt
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:25 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2019/06/10 23:18:02, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> > > ...Ross has it exactly right. Gris followed the process. As to the steps
> > > before the report is filed... there is (dare I say it) a lot of diversity
> > > in how those reports are developed. That's entirely up to the VP and the
> > > committee...
> >
> > Yes, and as a committee member I strongly suggest that we operate like a
> > PMC, where team members are consulted before sending important things like
> > Board reports or budget requests.
> >
> > I'm not interested personally in being part of a committee where things
> > are decided top-down. I understand *in a minority of cases* this is needed
> > to move fast but such cases should be an exception - in my view.
> >
> > Gris, please let us know how you see things!
> >
> > -Bertrand
> >
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org>.
I agree in general, but I'd like to point out that reports can be edited
after the fact. Posting a report to the board agenda, doesn't mean that
further input isn't welcome from the group.
Best,
Myrle
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:25 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2019/06/10 23:18:02, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> > ...Ross has it exactly right. Gris followed the process. As to the steps
> > before the report is filed... there is (dare I say it) a lot of diversity
> > in how those reports are developed. That's entirely up to the VP and the
> > committee...
>
> Yes, and as a committee member I strongly suggest that we operate like a
> PMC, where team members are consulted before sending important things like
> Board reports or budget requests.
>
> I'm not interested personally in being part of a committee where things
> are decided top-down. I understand *in a minority of cases* this is needed
> to move fast but such cases should be an exception - in my view.
>
> Gris, please let us know how you see things!
>
> -Bertrand
>
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> Yes, and as a committee member I strongly suggest that we operate like a PMC, where team members are consulted before sending important things like Board reports or budget requests.
It’s also a valuable way to get feedback from the rest of the committee before submitting the report. They could point out improvements or omissions and many of them have experience in writing board reports and may have a better idea of what the board likes to see in them.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On 2019/06/10 23:18:02, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> ...Ross has it exactly right. Gris followed the process. As to the steps
> before the report is filed... there is (dare I say it) a lot of diversity
> in how those reports are developed. That's entirely up to the VP and the
> committee...
Yes, and as a committee member I strongly suggest that we operate like a PMC, where team members are consulted before sending important things like Board reports or budget requests.
I'm not interested personally in being part of a committee where things are decided top-down. I understand *in a minority of cases* this is needed to move fast but such cases should be an exception - in my view.
Gris, please let us know how you see things!
-Bertrand
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
Ross has it exactly right. Gris followed the process. As to the steps
before the report is filed... there is (dare I say it) a lot of diversity
in how those reports are developed. That's entirely up to the VP and the
committee.
As VP Whimsy, I directly post the report without copying the committee.
That's never caused problems. Whether that approach is appropriate here or
not, I'll leave to the VP and committee
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:36 PM Ross Gardler
<Ro...@microsoft.com.invalid> wrote:
> Board reports are submitted by adding them to the agenda in SVN. There is
> no requirement to submit them to board@ as well, notifications go to a
> list.
>
> As you note we are not a PMC. VP Diversity reports to Prez and thus
> reports are submitted to the Prez. There is no need for the VP to consult
> with the rest of us.
>
> That said, in order to build a strong team it would be wise to ensure that
> the team is aware of what is being reported. Being involved in writing the
> report is less important as it should be reflecting what we already see on
> list.
>
> Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 2:01:09 PM
> To: dev@diversity.apache.org; Naomi Slater
> Subject: Re: Concerns about process
>
> Thanks for helping guide Gris. She's just learning about how things
> work at the ASF.
>
> On 6/10/2019 4:48 PM, Naomi Slater wrote:
> > hey folks,
> >
> > two things that have happened in the past couple of days that concern me
> >
> > the first is that a board report was prepared and sent to the board by
> the
> > Chair without any input from the committee. (Gris acknowledged this a
> > separate follow-up email she sent to dev@diversity)
> >
> > SIDE NOTE: I am subscribed to board@ but I didn't receive the original
> copy
> > of the board report. so I am wondering which list it was sent to.
> perhaps I
> > have a misconfigured email client?
> >
> > ANOTHER SIDE NOTE: it is generally a good idea to copy dev@ when sending
> > the report to board@. that way, there is no need to send an additional
> > followup notification to dev@diversity
> >
> > my second concern is that I learned about a proposed D&I budget request
> > only because Jim copied in the private@diversity list on a thread that
> > seems to have been started on opperations@ (to which I am not
> subscribed)
> >
> > we had a brainstorming thread about our budget request last month, but to
> > the best of my knowledge, there has been no chance for the committee to
> > work on the actual proposal that was sent. I have seen no emails about
> it,
> > no draft text, no requests for review, etc
> >
> > as far PMCs are concerned, Chairs (who also serve as the VP of the
> > respective project) are not "project leaders". they function as an
> elected
> > representative of the committee to the board and are responsible for
> > foundation-level admin but they do not hold any special decision-making
> > power above-and-beyond a regular committee member
> >
> > cf.
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcouchdb.apache.org%2Fbylaws.html%23chair&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cbbfdae4c67c54a095bba08d6ede6c5e1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636957972750652411&sdata=hxrxTXbKwKlxyqGJpiEjchgu2bzCf4EAhK5umbkyZhA%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > we are not a PMC, though. so I am not sure how things are meant to
> operate
> > with this committee. (this is one of the reasons I suggested that we
> draft
> > some bylaws that would clarify this sort of thing)
> >
> > I think that we should operate the way that a standard PMC does. that is,
> > decisions are made on-list, *by the committee*, and the Chair (i.e., VP
> > D&I) has the primary function of interfacing with the board
> >
> > apologies, Gris, if we're on the same page and these were both just
> > procedural oversights!! most new committees have teething troubles and
> > there's no reason we should be any different. but I figure this is an
> > important issue and one we should get clarity on as early as possible
> >
>
> --
> Kevin A. McGrail
> Member, Apache Software Foundation
> Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
>
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fkmcgrail&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cbbfdae4c67c54a095bba08d6ede6c5e1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636957972750662405&sdata=GADD7z8IFbinGoPm3dF8nI1nh%2BiHESB8Yr4d1mCcuzE%3D&reserved=0
> - 703.798.0171
>
>
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by Ross Gardler <Ro...@microsoft.com.INVALID>.
Board reports are submitted by adding them to the agenda in SVN. There is no requirement to submit them to board@ as well, notifications go to a list.
As you note we are not a PMC. VP Diversity reports to Prez and thus reports are submitted to the Prez. There is no need for the VP to consult with the rest of us.
That said, in order to build a strong team it would be wise to ensure that the team is aware of what is being reported. Being involved in writing the report is less important as it should be reflecting what we already see on list.
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
________________________________
From: Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 2:01:09 PM
To: dev@diversity.apache.org; Naomi Slater
Subject: Re: Concerns about process
Thanks for helping guide Gris. She's just learning about how things
work at the ASF.
On 6/10/2019 4:48 PM, Naomi Slater wrote:
> hey folks,
>
> two things that have happened in the past couple of days that concern me
>
> the first is that a board report was prepared and sent to the board by the
> Chair without any input from the committee. (Gris acknowledged this a
> separate follow-up email she sent to dev@diversity)
>
> SIDE NOTE: I am subscribed to board@ but I didn't receive the original copy
> of the board report. so I am wondering which list it was sent to. perhaps I
> have a misconfigured email client?
>
> ANOTHER SIDE NOTE: it is generally a good idea to copy dev@ when sending
> the report to board@. that way, there is no need to send an additional
> followup notification to dev@diversity
>
> my second concern is that I learned about a proposed D&I budget request
> only because Jim copied in the private@diversity list on a thread that
> seems to have been started on opperations@ (to which I am not subscribed)
>
> we had a brainstorming thread about our budget request last month, but to
> the best of my knowledge, there has been no chance for the committee to
> work on the actual proposal that was sent. I have seen no emails about it,
> no draft text, no requests for review, etc
>
> as far PMCs are concerned, Chairs (who also serve as the VP of the
> respective project) are not "project leaders". they function as an elected
> representative of the committee to the board and are responsible for
> foundation-level admin but they do not hold any special decision-making
> power above-and-beyond a regular committee member
>
> cf. https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcouchdb.apache.org%2Fbylaws.html%23chair&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cbbfdae4c67c54a095bba08d6ede6c5e1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636957972750652411&sdata=hxrxTXbKwKlxyqGJpiEjchgu2bzCf4EAhK5umbkyZhA%3D&reserved=0
>
> we are not a PMC, though. so I am not sure how things are meant to operate
> with this committee. (this is one of the reasons I suggested that we draft
> some bylaws that would clarify this sort of thing)
>
> I think that we should operate the way that a standard PMC does. that is,
> decisions are made on-list, *by the committee*, and the Chair (i.e., VP
> D&I) has the primary function of interfacing with the board
>
> apologies, Gris, if we're on the same page and these were both just
> procedural oversights!! most new committees have teething troubles and
> there's no reason we should be any different. but I figure this is an
> important issue and one we should get clarity on as early as possible
>
--
Kevin A. McGrail
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fkmcgrail&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cbbfdae4c67c54a095bba08d6ede6c5e1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636957972750662405&sdata=GADD7z8IFbinGoPm3dF8nI1nh%2BiHESB8Yr4d1mCcuzE%3D&reserved=0 - 703.798.0171
Re: Concerns about process
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <km...@apache.org>.
Thanks for helping guide Gris. She's just learning about how things
work at the ASF.
On 6/10/2019 4:48 PM, Naomi Slater wrote:
> hey folks,
>
> two things that have happened in the past couple of days that concern me
>
> the first is that a board report was prepared and sent to the board by the
> Chair without any input from the committee. (Gris acknowledged this a
> separate follow-up email she sent to dev@diversity)
>
> SIDE NOTE: I am subscribed to board@ but I didn't receive the original copy
> of the board report. so I am wondering which list it was sent to. perhaps I
> have a misconfigured email client?
>
> ANOTHER SIDE NOTE: it is generally a good idea to copy dev@ when sending
> the report to board@. that way, there is no need to send an additional
> followup notification to dev@diversity
>
> my second concern is that I learned about a proposed D&I budget request
> only because Jim copied in the private@diversity list on a thread that
> seems to have been started on opperations@ (to which I am not subscribed)
>
> we had a brainstorming thread about our budget request last month, but to
> the best of my knowledge, there has been no chance for the committee to
> work on the actual proposal that was sent. I have seen no emails about it,
> no draft text, no requests for review, etc
>
> as far PMCs are concerned, Chairs (who also serve as the VP of the
> respective project) are not "project leaders". they function as an elected
> representative of the committee to the board and are responsible for
> foundation-level admin but they do not hold any special decision-making
> power above-and-beyond a regular committee member
>
> cf. https://couchdb.apache.org/bylaws.html#chair
>
> we are not a PMC, though. so I am not sure how things are meant to operate
> with this committee. (this is one of the reasons I suggested that we draft
> some bylaws that would clarify this sort of thing)
>
> I think that we should operate the way that a standard PMC does. that is,
> decisions are made on-list, *by the committee*, and the Chair (i.e., VP
> D&I) has the primary function of interfacing with the board
>
> apologies, Gris, if we're on the same page and these were both just
> procedural oversights!! most new committees have teething troubles and
> there's no reason we should be any different. but I figure this is an
> important issue and one we should get clarity on as early as possible
>
--
Kevin A. McGrail
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171