You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@diversity.apache.org by "Kevin A. McGrail" <km...@apache.org> on 2019/07/08 17:04:07 UTC
Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from call
w/ Outreachy's team
On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean nothing can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time for community feedback and engagement.
>
> No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
Ross,
The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
invite to others on list is a no-no.
For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
Apache Way.
Regards,
KAM
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Ross Gardler <Ro...@microsoft.com.INVALID>.
+1000
Having served in many roles, including setting up GSoC, President, EVP, VP, Director and, of course, committer, I don't need a lecture on what the Apache Way is or how to empower Gris and team to get stuff done within it.
More importantly I am here to ensure Gris and team don't succumb to the kind of random process enforcement that is now common for some people.
That is the kind of nonsense that says nobody can move without the implicit permission of everyone on this list and/or the board is a sure fire way to fail. Reversible steps are fine. If you want it in Apache Way terms then think of it as Commit Then Review vs Review Then Commit.
I'll be equally as forceful when things aren't done well.
Ross
---
Sent from my phone, likely while waking down the stars and having a conversation. Sorry about my carelessness, I blame the machines.
________________________________
From: Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 6:34:29 PM
To: dev@diversity.apache.org <de...@diversity.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from call w/ Outreachy's team
A reminder Kevin,
While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many volunteers
Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts have, in
the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the right
to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the right
to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to be
able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and in
Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds of
that role.
Best Regards,
Myrle
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> > "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean nothing
> can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time for
> community feedback and engagement.
> >
> > No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
>
> Ross,
>
> The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
> invite to others on list is a no-no.
>
> For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
> Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
> planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
> just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
>
> We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
> synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
> pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
> Apache Way.
>
> Regards,
>
> KAM
>
>
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <km...@apache.org>.
Either way it is wrong to threaten my posting ability for relaying a valid
complaint.
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019, 15:00 Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 7/8/19 3:08 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> > I will be negative 1 and say that planners, also not a traditional pmc,
> > just had a complaint last month for this exact type of issue. Made by
> > Sally Khudairi.
>
>
> FWIW, at the time I interpreted that more as a "would have been nice to
> know" than a "YOU MUST".
>
> Notifying folks that there's going to be a meeting is probably a good
> thing. Making it an open invitation for all committee members is not,
> since it decreases the signal-to-noise in the meeting, and often leaves
> the outside party confused as to which voice was authoritative.
>
> Internal-only meetings - sure, invite the whole family. External
> meetings, where we are representing ourselves to a third party, need to
> have a clear leader.
>
> All IMHO, of course, but leaning heavily on a long history of Doing It
> Wrong in ConCom.
>
>
> > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019, 14:05 Ross Gardler <Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com
> .invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Sent from my phone, likely while waking down the stars and having a
> >> conversation. Sorry about my carelessness, I blame the machines.
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org>
> >> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 8:00:46 PM
> >> To: dev@diversity.apache.org <de...@diversity.apache.org>
> >> Subject: Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap
> >> from call w/ Outreachy's team
> >>
> >> Thanks Myrle, and thank you Kevin for your intention to guide me.
> >>
> >> Even when I might be relatively new to the ASF (been here for 2 years),
> I
> >> want to clarify that this wasn't a "newbie mistake", I understand
> >> transparency is key in the Apache Way. I intentionally didn't invite the
> >> entire committee because this was a meeting I needed in order to make an
> >> informed decision on how to move forward once we sorted other matters.
> >>
> >> The Apache Way encourages transparency and I honored that by bringing
> back
> >> to the list the result of a meeting I called, I didn't make a decision
> nor
> >> hide the outcome.
> >>
> >> I anticipate that I will continue to have more meetings where I won't be
> >> able to invite the entire committee and I'd appreciate not to continue
> >> being corrected for that. I'm saying this not because I'm too proud or
> >> don't want to live by the Apache Way, I'm saying this because I want to
> get
> >> the freedom to work on my own style and also set the stage for other in
> >> this committee to do it.
> >>
> >> One more point I'd like to make is that, there is no need for the entire
> >> committee to be in every single discussion or project. There are so many
> >> initiatives, and we are short in hands. I'd love for us to be a team
> where
> >> we trust each other and we can delegate and lead.
> >>
> >> I hope you understand where I am coming from.
> >> G
> >>
> >> On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 10:34, Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> A reminder Kevin,
> >>>
> >>> While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many
> volunteers
> >>> Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
> >>> Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts
> have,
> >> in
> >>> the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
> >>> structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the
> right
> >>> to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
> >>>
> >>> What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
> >>> achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the
> >> right
> >>> to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
> >>> consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to
> >> be
> >>> able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
> >>> D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and
> in
> >>> Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds
> of
> >>> that role.
> >>>
> >>> Best Regards,
> >>> Myrle
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> >>>>> "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean
> >>> nothing
> >>>> can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time
> >> for
> >>>> community feedback and engagement.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ross,
> >>>>
> >>>> The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending
> the
> >>>> invite to others on list is a no-no.
> >>>>
> >>>> For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
> >>>> Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information
> on
> >>>> planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
> >>>> just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
> >>>>
> >>>> We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance.
> Using
> >>>> synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
> >>>> pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
> >>>> Apache Way.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> KAM
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
> http://rcbowen.com/
> @rbowen
>
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 7/8/19 3:08 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> I will be negative 1 and say that planners, also not a traditional pmc,
> just had a complaint last month for this exact type of issue. Made by
> Sally Khudairi.
FWIW, at the time I interpreted that more as a "would have been nice to
know" than a "YOU MUST".
Notifying folks that there's going to be a meeting is probably a good
thing. Making it an open invitation for all committee members is not,
since it decreases the signal-to-noise in the meeting, and often leaves
the outside party confused as to which voice was authoritative.
Internal-only meetings - sure, invite the whole family. External
meetings, where we are representing ourselves to a third party, need to
have a clear leader.
All IMHO, of course, but leaning heavily on a long history of Doing It
Wrong in ConCom.
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019, 14:05 Ross Gardler <Ro...@microsoft.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Sent from my phone, likely while waking down the stars and having a
>> conversation. Sorry about my carelessness, I blame the machines.
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org>
>> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 8:00:46 PM
>> To: dev@diversity.apache.org <de...@diversity.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap
>> from call w/ Outreachy's team
>>
>> Thanks Myrle, and thank you Kevin for your intention to guide me.
>>
>> Even when I might be relatively new to the ASF (been here for 2 years), I
>> want to clarify that this wasn't a "newbie mistake", I understand
>> transparency is key in the Apache Way. I intentionally didn't invite the
>> entire committee because this was a meeting I needed in order to make an
>> informed decision on how to move forward once we sorted other matters.
>>
>> The Apache Way encourages transparency and I honored that by bringing back
>> to the list the result of a meeting I called, I didn't make a decision nor
>> hide the outcome.
>>
>> I anticipate that I will continue to have more meetings where I won't be
>> able to invite the entire committee and I'd appreciate not to continue
>> being corrected for that. I'm saying this not because I'm too proud or
>> don't want to live by the Apache Way, I'm saying this because I want to get
>> the freedom to work on my own style and also set the stage for other in
>> this committee to do it.
>>
>> One more point I'd like to make is that, there is no need for the entire
>> committee to be in every single discussion or project. There are so many
>> initiatives, and we are short in hands. I'd love for us to be a team where
>> we trust each other and we can delegate and lead.
>>
>> I hope you understand where I am coming from.
>> G
>>
>> On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 10:34, Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> A reminder Kevin,
>>>
>>> While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many volunteers
>>> Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
>>> Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts have,
>> in
>>> the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
>>> structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the right
>>> to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
>>>
>>> What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
>>> achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the
>> right
>>> to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
>>> consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to
>> be
>>> able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
>>> D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and in
>>> Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds of
>>> that role.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Myrle
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>>> "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean
>>> nothing
>>>> can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time
>> for
>>>> community feedback and engagement.
>>>>>
>>>>> No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
>>>>
>>>> Ross,
>>>>
>>>> The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
>>>> invite to others on list is a no-no.
>>>>
>>>> For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
>>>> Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
>>>> planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
>>>> just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
>>>>
>>>> We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
>>>> synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
>>>> pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
>>>> Apache Way.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> KAM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
http://rcbowen.com/
@rbowen
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Ross Gardler <Ro...@microsoft.com.INVALID>.
+1
---
Sent from my phone, likely while waking down the stars and having a conversation. Sorry about my carelessness, I blame the machines.
________________________________
From: Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 8:14:08 PM
To: dev@diversity.apache.org <de...@diversity.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from call w/ Outreachy's team
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:08 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I will be negative 1
Kevin: noted. Gris: proceed.
> and say that planners, also not a traditional pmc,
> just had a complaint last month for this exact type of issue. Made by
> Sally Khudairi.
Take it off list. Gris is working within her designated role and
involving others. This is not the case with the issue you are
describing.
- Sam Ruby
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:08 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I will be negative 1
Kevin: noted. Gris: proceed.
> and say that planners, also not a traditional pmc,
> just had a complaint last month for this exact type of issue. Made by
> Sally Khudairi.
Take it off list. Gris is working within her designated role and
involving others. This is not the case with the issue you are
describing.
- Sam Ruby
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <km...@apache.org>.
I will be negative 1 and say that planners, also not a traditional pmc,
just had a complaint last month for this exact type of issue. Made by
Sally Khudairi.
Regards, KAM
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019, 14:05 Ross Gardler <Ro...@microsoft.com.invalid>
wrote:
> +1
>
> ---
>
> Sent from my phone, likely while waking down the stars and having a
> conversation. Sorry about my carelessness, I blame the machines.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 8:00:46 PM
> To: dev@diversity.apache.org <de...@diversity.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap
> from call w/ Outreachy's team
>
> Thanks Myrle, and thank you Kevin for your intention to guide me.
>
> Even when I might be relatively new to the ASF (been here for 2 years), I
> want to clarify that this wasn't a "newbie mistake", I understand
> transparency is key in the Apache Way. I intentionally didn't invite the
> entire committee because this was a meeting I needed in order to make an
> informed decision on how to move forward once we sorted other matters.
>
> The Apache Way encourages transparency and I honored that by bringing back
> to the list the result of a meeting I called, I didn't make a decision nor
> hide the outcome.
>
> I anticipate that I will continue to have more meetings where I won't be
> able to invite the entire committee and I'd appreciate not to continue
> being corrected for that. I'm saying this not because I'm too proud or
> don't want to live by the Apache Way, I'm saying this because I want to get
> the freedom to work on my own style and also set the stage for other in
> this committee to do it.
>
> One more point I'd like to make is that, there is no need for the entire
> committee to be in every single discussion or project. There are so many
> initiatives, and we are short in hands. I'd love for us to be a team where
> we trust each other and we can delegate and lead.
>
> I hope you understand where I am coming from.
> G
>
> On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 10:34, Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > A reminder Kevin,
> >
> > While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many volunteers
> > Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
> > Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts have,
> in
> > the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
> > structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the right
> > to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
> >
> > What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
> > achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the
> right
> > to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
> > consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to
> be
> > able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
> > D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and in
> > Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds of
> > that role.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Myrle
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> > > > "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean
> > nothing
> > > can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time
> for
> > > community feedback and engagement.
> > > >
> > > > No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
> > >
> > > Ross,
> > >
> > > The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
> > > invite to others on list is a no-no.
> > >
> > > For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
> > > Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
> > > planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
> > > just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
> > >
> > > We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
> > > synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
> > > pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
> > > Apache Way.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > KAM
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Naomi S <no...@tumbolia.org>.
+1
On Mon 8. Jul 2019 at 21:05, Ross Gardler
<Ro...@microsoft.com.invalid> wrote:
> +1
>
> ---
>
> Sent from my phone, likely while waking down the stars and having a
> conversation. Sorry about my carelessness, I blame the machines.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 8:00:46 PM
> To: dev@diversity.apache.org <de...@diversity.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap
> from call w/ Outreachy's team
>
> Thanks Myrle, and thank you Kevin for your intention to guide me.
>
> Even when I might be relatively new to the ASF (been here for 2 years), I
> want to clarify that this wasn't a "newbie mistake", I understand
> transparency is key in the Apache Way. I intentionally didn't invite the
> entire committee because this was a meeting I needed in order to make an
> informed decision on how to move forward once we sorted other matters.
>
> The Apache Way encourages transparency and I honored that by bringing back
> to the list the result of a meeting I called, I didn't make a decision nor
> hide the outcome.
>
> I anticipate that I will continue to have more meetings where I won't be
> able to invite the entire committee and I'd appreciate not to continue
> being corrected for that. I'm saying this not because I'm too proud or
> don't want to live by the Apache Way, I'm saying this because I want to get
> the freedom to work on my own style and also set the stage for other in
> this committee to do it.
>
> One more point I'd like to make is that, there is no need for the entire
> committee to be in every single discussion or project. There are so many
> initiatives, and we are short in hands. I'd love for us to be a team where
> we trust each other and we can delegate and lead.
>
> I hope you understand where I am coming from.
> G
>
> On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 10:34, Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > A reminder Kevin,
> >
> > While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many volunteers
> > Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
> > Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts have,
> in
> > the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
> > structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the right
> > to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
> >
> > What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
> > achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the
> right
> > to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
> > consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to
> be
> > able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
> > D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and in
> > Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds of
> > that role.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Myrle
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> > > > "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean
> > nothing
> > > can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time
> for
> > > community feedback and engagement.
> > > >
> > > > No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
> > >
> > > Ross,
> > >
> > > The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
> > > invite to others on list is a no-no.
> > >
> > > For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
> > > Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
> > > planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
> > > just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
> > >
> > > We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
> > > synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
> > > pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
> > > Apache Way.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > KAM
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Ross Gardler <Ro...@microsoft.com.INVALID>.
+1
---
Sent from my phone, likely while waking down the stars and having a conversation. Sorry about my carelessness, I blame the machines.
________________________________
From: Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 8:00:46 PM
To: dev@diversity.apache.org <de...@diversity.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from call w/ Outreachy's team
Thanks Myrle, and thank you Kevin for your intention to guide me.
Even when I might be relatively new to the ASF (been here for 2 years), I
want to clarify that this wasn't a "newbie mistake", I understand
transparency is key in the Apache Way. I intentionally didn't invite the
entire committee because this was a meeting I needed in order to make an
informed decision on how to move forward once we sorted other matters.
The Apache Way encourages transparency and I honored that by bringing back
to the list the result of a meeting I called, I didn't make a decision nor
hide the outcome.
I anticipate that I will continue to have more meetings where I won't be
able to invite the entire committee and I'd appreciate not to continue
being corrected for that. I'm saying this not because I'm too proud or
don't want to live by the Apache Way, I'm saying this because I want to get
the freedom to work on my own style and also set the stage for other in
this committee to do it.
One more point I'd like to make is that, there is no need for the entire
committee to be in every single discussion or project. There are so many
initiatives, and we are short in hands. I'd love for us to be a team where
we trust each other and we can delegate and lead.
I hope you understand where I am coming from.
G
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 10:34, Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
> A reminder Kevin,
>
> While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many volunteers
> Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
> Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts have, in
> the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
> structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the right
> to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
>
> What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
> achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the right
> to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
> consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to be
> able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
> D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and in
> Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds of
> that role.
>
> Best Regards,
> Myrle
>
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> > > "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean
> nothing
> > can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time for
> > community feedback and engagement.
> > >
> > > No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
> >
> > Ross,
> >
> > The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
> > invite to others on list is a no-no.
> >
> > For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
> > Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
> > planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
> > just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
> >
> > We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
> > synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
> > pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
> > Apache Way.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > KAM
> >
> >
>
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Joan Touzet <wo...@apache.org>.
You have my full support, Gris.
Thanks for having the call and for bringing the info back to the list.
I'll digest this overnight and email if I have any questions.
-Joan
On 2019-07-08 15:00, Griselda Cuevas wrote:
> Thanks Myrle, and thank you Kevin for your intention to guide me.
>
> Even when I might be relatively new to the ASF (been here for 2 years), I
> want to clarify that this wasn't a "newbie mistake", I understand
> transparency is key in the Apache Way. I intentionally didn't invite the
> entire committee because this was a meeting I needed in order to make an
> informed decision on how to move forward once we sorted other matters.
>
> The Apache Way encourages transparency and I honored that by bringing back
> to the list the result of a meeting I called, I didn't make a decision nor
> hide the outcome.
>
> I anticipate that I will continue to have more meetings where I won't be
> able to invite the entire committee and I'd appreciate not to continue
> being corrected for that. I'm saying this not because I'm too proud or
> don't want to live by the Apache Way, I'm saying this because I want to get
> the freedom to work on my own style and also set the stage for other in
> this committee to do it.
>
> One more point I'd like to make is that, there is no need for the entire
> committee to be in every single discussion or project. There are so many
> initiatives, and we are short in hands. I'd love for us to be a team where
> we trust each other and we can delegate and lead.
>
> I hope you understand where I am coming from.
> G
>
> On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 10:34, Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> A reminder Kevin,
>>
>> While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many volunteers
>> Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
>> Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts have, in
>> the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
>> structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the right
>> to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
>>
>> What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
>> achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the right
>> to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
>> consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to be
>> able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
>> D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and in
>> Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds of
>> that role.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Myrle
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>> "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean
>> nothing
>>> can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time for
>>> community feedback and engagement.
>>>>
>>>> No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
>>>
>>> Ross,
>>>
>>> The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
>>> invite to others on list is a no-no.
>>>
>>> For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
>>> Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
>>> planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
>>> just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
>>>
>>> We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
>>> synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
>>> pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
>>> Apache Way.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> KAM
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 7/8/19 3:00 PM, Griselda Cuevas wrote:
> One more point I'd like to make is that, there is no need for the entire
> committee to be in every single discussion or project. There are so many
> initiatives, and we are short in hands. I'd love for us to be a team where
> we trust each other and we can delegate and lead.
Big +1 to that.
Anecdotally, the MAIN reason that ConCom ended up being disbanded was
the gridlock that resulted from several dozen people insisting on being
on every phone call, and to have a voice in every decision.
When you're going to have a real-time phone-call with a "vendor",
keeping the number of participants small is a great way to ensure they
don't run away screaming.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com
http://rcbowen.com/
@rbowen
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Griselda Cuevas <gr...@apache.org>.
Thanks Myrle, and thank you Kevin for your intention to guide me.
Even when I might be relatively new to the ASF (been here for 2 years), I
want to clarify that this wasn't a "newbie mistake", I understand
transparency is key in the Apache Way. I intentionally didn't invite the
entire committee because this was a meeting I needed in order to make an
informed decision on how to move forward once we sorted other matters.
The Apache Way encourages transparency and I honored that by bringing back
to the list the result of a meeting I called, I didn't make a decision nor
hide the outcome.
I anticipate that I will continue to have more meetings where I won't be
able to invite the entire committee and I'd appreciate not to continue
being corrected for that. I'm saying this not because I'm too proud or
don't want to live by the Apache Way, I'm saying this because I want to get
the freedom to work on my own style and also set the stage for other in
this committee to do it.
One more point I'd like to make is that, there is no need for the entire
committee to be in every single discussion or project. There are so many
initiatives, and we are short in hands. I'd love for us to be a team where
we trust each other and we can delegate and lead.
I hope you understand where I am coming from.
G
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 10:34, Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org> wrote:
> A reminder Kevin,
>
> While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many volunteers
> Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
> Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts have, in
> the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
> structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the right
> to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
>
> What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
> achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the right
> to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
> consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to be
> able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
> D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and in
> Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds of
> that role.
>
> Best Regards,
> Myrle
>
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> > > "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean
> nothing
> > can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time for
> > community feedback and engagement.
> > >
> > > No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
> >
> > Ross,
> >
> > The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
> > invite to others on list is a no-no.
> >
> > For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
> > Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
> > planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
> > just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
> >
> > We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
> > synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
> > pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
> > Apache Way.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > KAM
> >
> >
>
Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap from
call w/ Outreachy's team
Posted by Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org>.
A reminder Kevin,
While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many volunteers
Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts have, in
the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the right
to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the right
to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to be
able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and in
Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds of
that role.
Best Regards,
Myrle
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <km...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> > "If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean nothing
> can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time for
> community feedback and engagement.
> >
> > No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
>
> Ross,
>
> The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
> invite to others on list is a no-no.
>
> For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
> Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
> planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
> just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
>
> We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
> synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
> pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
> Apache Way.
>
> Regards,
>
> KAM
>
>