You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to marketing@cloudstack.apache.org by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com> on 2013/04/04 16:45:15 UTC
Events Approval
Hi,
I need to request approval for two events that I have been working on, according to our trademark policy guidelines:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guidelines+(DRAFT)
*Citrix would like to donate sponsoring of HPDC:
http://hpdc.org/2013/
HPDC is an Academic conference on distributed systems, the sponsoring is for the best paper awards. The current CloudStack logo is already listed on the website and can be replaced by the new one with the proper trademarks symbol if needed. The CloudStack community would get a table, with table cloth with cloudstack logo, pop-up banner with cloudstack logo, and handout tee-shirts with cloudstack logo for free.
*Citrix would like to donate silver sponsorship of DevOps Days Amsterdam:
http://devopsdays.org/events/2013-amsterdam/
CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free tee-shirts with cloudstack logo
I am also working on other events where there is no sponsoring (in the sense of paid sponsoring), and I would like to list the one for which I received acceptance notification:
*I got approval for an Apache CloudStack "project" presence at LinuxTag (Berlin May 22-25)
http://www.linuxtag.org/2013/
CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free tee-shirts with cloudstack logo
At least one Apache CloudStack Committer will be present at these events.
-Sebastien
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013, at 09:45 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to request approval for two events that I have been working on,
> according to our trademark policy guidelines:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guidelines+(DRAFT)
+1 from me.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Requests for approval should be made to the PMC, not the marketing@ list.
The marketing@ list is a convenience tool only. The PMC is the body that
makes the approvals. Or am I misunderstanding something?
On 4 April 2013 15:52, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 10:45:15AM -0400, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I need to request approval for two events that I have been working on,
> according to our trademark policy guidelines:
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guidelines+(DRAFT)
> >
> > *Citrix would like to donate sponsoring of HPDC:
> > http://hpdc.org/2013/
> > HPDC is an Academic conference on distributed systems, the sponsoring is
> for the best paper awards. The current CloudStack logo is already listed on
> the website and can be replaced by the new one with the proper trademarks
> symbol if needed. The CloudStack community would get a table, with table
> cloth with cloudstack logo, pop-up banner with cloudstack logo, and handout
> tee-shirts with cloudstack logo for free.
> >
> > *Citrix would like to donate silver sponsorship of DevOps Days Amsterdam:
> > http://devopsdays.org/events/2013-amsterdam/
> > CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free
> tee-shirts with cloudstack logo
> >
> > I am also working on other events where there is no sponsoring (in the
> sense of paid sponsoring), and I would like to list the one for which I
> received acceptance notification:
> >
> > *I got approval for an Apache CloudStack "project" presence at LinuxTag
> (Berlin May 22-25)
> > http://www.linuxtag.org/2013/
> > CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free
> tee-shirts with cloudstack logo
> >
> > At least one Apache CloudStack Committer will be present at these events.
> >
> > -Sebastien
>
> Sebastien,
>
> I'm +1 to these, and I believe we can assume a 72 hour "no objection"
> approach to approval.
>
> When you check with ConCom, let us know how it goes there. Also, if
> they disagree with being asked about this sort of thing we should change
> our docs... ;-)
>
--
NS
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 10:45:15AM -0400, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to request approval for two events that I have been working on, according to our trademark policy guidelines:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guidelines+(DRAFT)
>
> *Citrix would like to donate sponsoring of HPDC:
> http://hpdc.org/2013/
> HPDC is an Academic conference on distributed systems, the sponsoring is for the best paper awards. The current CloudStack logo is already listed on the website and can be replaced by the new one with the proper trademarks symbol if needed. The CloudStack community would get a table, with table cloth with cloudstack logo, pop-up banner with cloudstack logo, and handout tee-shirts with cloudstack logo for free.
>
> *Citrix would like to donate silver sponsorship of DevOps Days Amsterdam:
> http://devopsdays.org/events/2013-amsterdam/
> CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free tee-shirts with cloudstack logo
>
> I am also working on other events where there is no sponsoring (in the sense of paid sponsoring), and I would like to list the one for which I received acceptance notification:
>
> *I got approval for an Apache CloudStack "project" presence at LinuxTag (Berlin May 22-25)
> http://www.linuxtag.org/2013/
> CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free tee-shirts with cloudstack logo
>
> At least one Apache CloudStack Committer will be present at these events.
>
> -Sebastien
Sebastien,
I'm +1 to these, and I believe we can assume a 72 hour "no objection"
approach to approval.
When you check with ConCom, let us know how it goes there. Also, if
they disagree with being asked about this sort of thing we should change
our docs... ;-)
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
I am a little out of my depth here, to be honest. I'm going to start a
thread on concom@apache.org.
On 9 April 2013 23:21, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> Agreed they should happen publicly. Perhaps it is fine to just do it on
> dev@, but we'd have to make it clear that PMC-level approval is happening
> on that list, and that if you don't subscribe, then you miss out. And hey,
> perhaps we could do that with marketing@ too. i.e. Communicate that if
> you're on the PMC and you want input on events, then you better subscribe.
> I think it's up to us to set the rules. But we should be clear about what
> we're doing, and how people should/can participate.
>
>
> On 9 April 2013 22:18, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 03:56 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> > But if we are saying that the PMC itself needs to grant approval, then
>> > the PMC as a whole needs to be copied in on the thread. Perhaps that is
>> just
>> > a CC to private@ with any formal request like this. We could then ask
>> that
>> > someone from the PMC acks the request, or we could just allow lazy
>> > consensus to apply, and if nobody objects, then it is approved.
>>
>> CC'ing private@ seems like a reasonable way to go. I'm with Chip that
>> these requests should happen publicly.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> jzb
>> --
>> Joe Brockmeier
>> jzb@zonker.net
>> Twitter: @jzb
>> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> NS
>
--
NS
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Sorry. I meant to say in my last email that I see no problem with this
thread being wrapped up. That's what I meant when I said "I'm not going to
block anything." i.e. Sure, let's go ahead with this.
You should be able to see the thread. The subject is "Typical process for
getting approval for events/sponsorship". This list is CCed. I just gave
Ross a nudge, to see if we can wrap that up, so we can update our
documentation.
On 16 April 2013 02:19, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:16:58PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > I was waiting for that thread to conclude. Still waiting on a reply from
> > Ross. But I'm not going to block anything. :)
>
> Noah,
>
> Can this be wrapped yet? I assume you are talking about something
> ongoing within the concom lists that we can't see?
>
> -chip
>
--
NS
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:16:58PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> I was waiting for that thread to conclude. Still waiting on a reply from
> Ross. But I'm not going to block anything. :)
Noah,
Can this be wrapped yet? I assume you are talking about something
ongoing within the concom lists that we can't see?
-chip
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
I was waiting for that thread to conclude. Still waiting on a reply from
Ross. But I'm not going to block anything. :)
On 10 April 2013 20:07, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> We've gotten a response from ConCom - can we sum up and close this
> thread?
>
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 06:41 PM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> > On Apr 9, 2013, at 6:13 PM, "Kelceydamage@bbits" <ke...@bbits.ca>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I think events should be discussed on marketing. Dev should remain
> 'Dev' related.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > On Apr 9, 2013, at 3:21 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Agreed they should happen publicly. Perhaps it is fine to just do it
> on dev@,
> > >> but we'd have to make it clear that PMC-level approval is happening
> on that
> > >> list, and that if you don't subscribe, then you miss out. And hey,
> perhaps
> > >> we could do that with marketing@ too. i.e. Communicate that if
> you're on
> > >> the PMC and you want input on events, then you better subscribe. I
> think
> > >> it's up to us to set the rules. But we should be clear about what
> we're
> > >> doing, and how people should/can participate.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 9 April 2013 22:18, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 03:56 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > >>>> But if we are saying that the PMC itself needs to grant approval,
> then
> > >>>> the PMC as a whole needs to be copied in on the thread. Perhaps
> that is
> > >>> just
> > >>>> a CC to private@ with any formal request like this. We could then
> ask
> > >>> that
> > >>>> someone from the PMC acks the request, or we could just allow lazy
> > >>>> consensus to apply, and if nobody objects, then it is approved.
> > >>>
> > >>> CC'ing private@ seems like a reasonable way to go. I'm with Chip
> that
> > >>> these requests should happen publicly.
> > >>>
> > >>> Best,
> > >>>
> > >>> jzb
> > >>> --
> > >>> Joe Brockmeier
> > >>> jzb@zonker.net
> > >>> Twitter: @jzb
> > >>> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> NS
>
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>
--
NS
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
We've gotten a response from ConCom - can we sum up and close this
thread?
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 06:41 PM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On Apr 9, 2013, at 6:13 PM, "Kelceydamage@bbits" <ke...@bbits.ca> wrote:
>
> > I think events should be discussed on marketing. Dev should remain 'Dev' related.
>
> +1
>
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Apr 9, 2013, at 3:21 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Agreed they should happen publicly. Perhaps it is fine to just do it on dev@,
> >> but we'd have to make it clear that PMC-level approval is happening on that
> >> list, and that if you don't subscribe, then you miss out. And hey, perhaps
> >> we could do that with marketing@ too. i.e. Communicate that if you're on
> >> the PMC and you want input on events, then you better subscribe. I think
> >> it's up to us to set the rules. But we should be clear about what we're
> >> doing, and how people should/can participate.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9 April 2013 22:18, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 03:56 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> >>>> But if we are saying that the PMC itself needs to grant approval, then
> >>>> the PMC as a whole needs to be copied in on the thread. Perhaps that is
> >>> just
> >>>> a CC to private@ with any formal request like this. We could then ask
> >>> that
> >>>> someone from the PMC acks the request, or we could just allow lazy
> >>>> consensus to apply, and if nobody objects, then it is approved.
> >>>
> >>> CC'ing private@ seems like a reasonable way to go. I'm with Chip that
> >>> these requests should happen publicly.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>>
> >>> jzb
> >>> --
> >>> Joe Brockmeier
> >>> jzb@zonker.net
> >>> Twitter: @jzb
> >>> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> NS
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
On Apr 9, 2013, at 6:13 PM, "Kelceydamage@bbits" <ke...@bbits.ca> wrote:
> I think events should be discussed on marketing. Dev should remain 'Dev' related.
+1
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 9, 2013, at 3:21 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Agreed they should happen publicly. Perhaps it is fine to just do it on dev@,
>> but we'd have to make it clear that PMC-level approval is happening on that
>> list, and that if you don't subscribe, then you miss out. And hey, perhaps
>> we could do that with marketing@ too. i.e. Communicate that if you're on
>> the PMC and you want input on events, then you better subscribe. I think
>> it's up to us to set the rules. But we should be clear about what we're
>> doing, and how people should/can participate.
>>
>>
>> On 9 April 2013 22:18, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 03:56 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>>>> But if we are saying that the PMC itself needs to grant approval, then
>>>> the PMC as a whole needs to be copied in on the thread. Perhaps that is
>>> just
>>>> a CC to private@ with any formal request like this. We could then ask
>>> that
>>>> someone from the PMC acks the request, or we could just allow lazy
>>>> consensus to apply, and if nobody objects, then it is approved.
>>>
>>> CC'ing private@ seems like a reasonable way to go. I'm with Chip that
>>> these requests should happen publicly.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> jzb
>>> --
>>> Joe Brockmeier
>>> jzb@zonker.net
>>> Twitter: @jzb
>>> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> NS
Re: Events Approval
Posted by "Kelceydamage@bbits" <ke...@bbits.ca>.
I think events should be discussed on marketing. Dev should remain 'Dev' related.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 9, 2013, at 3:21 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> Agreed they should happen publicly. Perhaps it is fine to just do it on dev@,
> but we'd have to make it clear that PMC-level approval is happening on that
> list, and that if you don't subscribe, then you miss out. And hey, perhaps
> we could do that with marketing@ too. i.e. Communicate that if you're on
> the PMC and you want input on events, then you better subscribe. I think
> it's up to us to set the rules. But we should be clear about what we're
> doing, and how people should/can participate.
>
>
> On 9 April 2013 22:18, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 03:56 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>>> But if we are saying that the PMC itself needs to grant approval, then
>>> the PMC as a whole needs to be copied in on the thread. Perhaps that is
>> just
>>> a CC to private@ with any formal request like this. We could then ask
>> that
>>> someone from the PMC acks the request, or we could just allow lazy
>>> consensus to apply, and if nobody objects, then it is approved.
>>
>> CC'ing private@ seems like a reasonable way to go. I'm with Chip that
>> these requests should happen publicly.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> jzb
>> --
>> Joe Brockmeier
>> jzb@zonker.net
>> Twitter: @jzb
>> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> NS
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Agreed they should happen publicly. Perhaps it is fine to just do it on dev@,
but we'd have to make it clear that PMC-level approval is happening on that
list, and that if you don't subscribe, then you miss out. And hey, perhaps
we could do that with marketing@ too. i.e. Communicate that if you're on
the PMC and you want input on events, then you better subscribe. I think
it's up to us to set the rules. But we should be clear about what we're
doing, and how people should/can participate.
On 9 April 2013 22:18, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 03:56 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > But if we are saying that the PMC itself needs to grant approval, then
> > the PMC as a whole needs to be copied in on the thread. Perhaps that is
> just
> > a CC to private@ with any formal request like this. We could then ask
> that
> > someone from the PMC acks the request, or we could just allow lazy
> > consensus to apply, and if nobody objects, then it is approved.
>
> CC'ing private@ seems like a reasonable way to go. I'm with Chip that
> these requests should happen publicly.
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>
--
NS
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>.
On Apr 9, 2013, at 5:18 PM, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 03:56 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> But if we are saying that the PMC itself needs to grant approval, then
>> the PMC as a whole needs to be copied in on the thread. Perhaps that is just
>> a CC to private@ with any formal request like this. We could then ask that
>> someone from the PMC acks the request, or we could just allow lazy
>> consensus to apply, and if nobody objects, then it is approved.
>
> CC'ing private@ seems like a reasonable way to go. I'm with Chip that
> these requests should happen publicly.
>
+1 I don't see what's private about it.
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 03:56 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> But if we are saying that the PMC itself needs to grant approval, then
> the PMC as a whole needs to be copied in on the thread. Perhaps that is just
> a CC to private@ with any formal request like this. We could then ask that
> someone from the PMC acks the request, or we could just allow lazy
> consensus to apply, and if nobody objects, then it is approved.
CC'ing private@ seems like a reasonable way to go. I'm with Chip that
these requests should happen publicly.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
It depends who we decide as a project needs to approve events and marketing
materials. Typically, the PMC is the body that does this. But we might also
want to redefine that and say that the community is able to make those
approvals.
If we decide that he community can do this without any direct
acknowledgement or approval from the PMC, then the dev@ list or the
marketing@ list would be fine. And I am sure a few PMC members would see
the thread also.
But if we are saying that the PMC itself needs to grant approval, then the
PMC as a whole needs to be copied in on the thread. Perhaps that is just a
CC to private@ with any formal request like this. We could then ask that
someone from the PMC acks the request, or we could just allow lazy
consensus to apply, and if nobody objects, then it is approved.
On 9 April 2013 21:51, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 09:47:37PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Just to clarify: I think your proposal looks good. But I don't think
> > sending an email to marketing@ constitutes an appropriate approval
> > mechanism if the PMC is the body that needs to grant approval.
>
> Are you proposing that event approvals be done in private (by emailing
> private@)?
>
> I don't agree with the need to do it in private, and since this is a
> list that PMC members should/can be on it can act as a perfectly good
> (and open) way to do things.
>
--
NS
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 09:47:37PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> Just to clarify: I think your proposal looks good. But I don't think
> sending an email to marketing@ constitutes an appropriate approval
> mechanism if the PMC is the body that needs to grant approval.
Are you proposing that event approvals be done in private (by emailing
private@)?
I don't agree with the need to do it in private, and since this is a
list that PMC members should/can be on it can act as a perfectly good
(and open) way to do things.
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Just to clarify: I think your proposal looks good. But I don't think
sending an email to marketing@ constitutes an appropriate approval
mechanism if the PMC is the body that needs to grant approval.
On 4 April 2013 15:45, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to request approval for two events that I have been working on,
> according to our trademark policy guidelines:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guidelines+(DRAFT)
>
> *Citrix would like to donate sponsoring of HPDC:
> http://hpdc.org/2013/
> HPDC is an Academic conference on distributed systems, the sponsoring is
> for the best paper awards. The current CloudStack logo is already listed on
> the website and can be replaced by the new one with the proper trademarks
> symbol if needed. The CloudStack community would get a table, with table
> cloth with cloudstack logo, pop-up banner with cloudstack logo, and handout
> tee-shirts with cloudstack logo for free.
>
> *Citrix would like to donate silver sponsorship of DevOps Days Amsterdam:
> http://devopsdays.org/events/2013-amsterdam/
> CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free tee-shirts
> with cloudstack logo
>
> I am also working on other events where there is no sponsoring (in the
> sense of paid sponsoring), and I would like to list the one for which I
> received acceptance notification:
>
> *I got approval for an Apache CloudStack "project" presence at LinuxTag
> (Berlin May 22-25)
> http://www.linuxtag.org/2013/
> CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free tee-shirts
> with cloudstack logo
>
> At least one Apache CloudStack Committer will be present at these events.
>
> -Sebastien
--
NS
Re: Events Approval
Posted by Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com>.
+1 - Good to have some EMEA presence. A lot of it has been US or India
based.
Matt
On 4/4/13 10:45 AM, "Sebastien Goasguen" <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I need to request approval for two events that I have been working on,
>according to our trademark policy guidelines:
>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guideline
>s+(DRAFT)
>
>*Citrix would like to donate sponsoring of HPDC:
>http://hpdc.org/2013/
>HPDC is an Academic conference on distributed systems, the sponsoring is
>for the best paper awards. The current CloudStack logo is already listed
>on the website and can be replaced by the new one with the proper
>trademarks symbol if needed. The CloudStack community would get a table,
>with table cloth with cloudstack logo, pop-up banner with cloudstack
>logo, and handout tee-shirts with cloudstack logo for free.
>
>*Citrix would like to donate silver sponsorship of DevOps Days Amsterdam:
>http://devopsdays.org/events/2013-amsterdam/
>CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free
>tee-shirts with cloudstack logo
>
>I am also working on other events where there is no sponsoring (in the
>sense of paid sponsoring), and I would like to list the one for which I
>received acceptance notification:
>
>*I got approval for an Apache CloudStack "project" presence at LinuxTag
>(Berlin May 22-25)
>http://www.linuxtag.org/2013/
>CloudStack community would get table/pop-up banner/handout free
>tee-shirts with cloudstack logo
>
>At least one Apache CloudStack Committer will be present at these events.
>
>-Sebastien