You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to marketing@cloudstack.apache.org by Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> on 2013/04/20 22:00:53 UTC
[DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Hi all,
The website for the CloudStack Collaboration Conference North America 2013 went up yesterday. Registration will open on Monday, April 22nd at 9:00am PT.
You may take a look at the website here: http://cloudstackcollab.org/
I've requested for the web team to change the logo to the current Apache CloudStack logo and that will be done before Monday 9:00am.
I would welcome any feedback or suggestions . Thanks!
Best regards,
Karen
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Oh, and, perhaps we want to add a note to the site mentioning that it is a
community run event? Giving a bit of transparency into the organisation,
etc, like you have done in this email. Not sure though. Might be useful to
some folks.
On 22 April 2013 20:23, Mark Hinkle <Ma...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Noah,
>
> I am in total agreement with doing this right though I am trying to figure
> out what we could have done better. I don't want to sound defensive but
> after following the Concom direction and reading and following the Event
> Branding policy I thought we had done everything we could to do things the
> Apache way. After signing on contract for the venue earlier this month...my
> heart skipped a few beats when I read your email.
>
> Initially the spring CloudStack Collab Conference was going to be
> organized by another community member this spring but they didn't have the
> ability to do so in the shorter timespan. We didn't send to private@ on
> the final discussion because I assumed that everyone on Devel@ was also
> private@ I'll do that going forward.
>
> The note to Concon@ went to them on 3/7 and I got a response with the
> subject RE:Permission for CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA 2013 on
> March 17th from Nick Burch indicating the beginning of lazy consensus.
>
> Since the website went live on Friday so it could be reviewed and it looks
> like we have gotten most of the feedback on the correct attribution of
> trademarks and clarification of the proper application of CloudStack as a
> mark. Karen sent the request to trademarks@ on the 21st to get their
> feedback and we'll make any changes that are requested. The subject is
> "[LOGO] Apache CloudStack Logo Usage - CloudStack Collaboration Conference
> North America 2013" from karen.vuong@citrix.com and has a complete list
> of the ways we plan to use all the Apache trademarks and that was cc'd to
> the private@. We needed to have the website up and decide on the various
> ways we planned to use them before we could show them. We will make
> everything right before promoting it I think there were plenty of
> suggestions over the last 48 hours and they are being implemented.
>
> On the question of who is running it. The intention is to be as
> collaborative as possible we want this to be a community conference not a
> Citrix run event.
> Citrix is covering all the costs of the conference minus any additional
> sponsor contributions. We paid for the venue and are listing as the Diamond
> Sponsor. We are also offering three levels of sponsorship for the
> conference (needs fixed on the website) $10K, $5K, and $1k to try to be as
> inclusive as possible. Since someone has to be the signatory for the venue
> and provide insurance Citrix did that. Sponsors will get lightning talks
> for their sponsorship and logo attribution on the website, conference
> t-shirt and venue. The total cost for the conference is going to be over
> $200K so we want as diverse and varied a group a sponsors as possible
> though we expect the vast majority of the cost is going to be shouldered by
> Citrix, hence the Diamond Sponsorship.
>
> The program is being planned by a group comprised of Chip Childers, VP of
> Apache CloudStack & Sunguard, John Kinsella, Apache CloudStack PMC &
> Stratosec, Joe Brockmeier Apache CloudStack PMC and Citrix, Karen
> Vuong-Citrix and me-Citrix.
>
> The talks are being reviewed and accepted by a committee of committers led
> by Joe Brockmeier and Chip Childers.
>
> At the suggestion of Concom we hired a professional conference producer.
> We are using the OpenBastion to organize things hoping their familiarity
> from running ApacheCon would help make things easier.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:54 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Karen, ignore my request. Despite having just read David's email, I
> didn't
> > tie your comment up to his comment. I have seen the link, and yes, PMC
> > approval for the conference itself seems to be established. Sorry for the
> > noise! :)
> >
> > Also, Mark, just to address your previous comment about "hoops". Sorry if
> > my emails are frustrating. I don't want to be a bother. I just think we
> > ought to do this right. (And trying to figure out what that means
> myself.)
> >
> > I don't think there are any major problems here. If ConCom have already
> > seen this, then that's good. Though, as I mention, I'd like to be able to
> > look up the thread. The only thing I would say here is that
> > private@cloudstack.apache.org should be CCed when reaching out to ConCom
> > and Trademarks, and what have you, just so we're all kept in the loop on
> > this stuff.
> >
> > About the trademarks stuff. I guess my only comment would be that this
> sort
> > of stuff is usually best sorted out before going live. I don't expect
> we'll
> > have any major problems. But the larger the event, the more circumspect
> we
> > should be.
> >
> > I just took a look at the website now, with a critical eye. And I have a
> > few questions, with my "user hat" on:
> >
> > 1) Who is running this conference? It looks to me like Apache CloudStack
> is
> > running it. Is that the case? If so, how is the community being involved?
> > If not, then who is, and what is the relationship to CloudStack?
> >
> > 2) The copyright says "all rights reserved." Not sure where we stand on
> > that sort of thing. At the very least, we may want to add "Apache
> > CloudStack, CloudSTack, and the project logo are trademarks of The Apache
> > Software Foundation" or something.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 21 April 2013 15:43, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Karen,
> >>
> >>
> >> On 21 April 2013 02:48, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 6) PPMC approval - 8 PMC members participated and seemed to
> all
> >>> be for the event (David has confirmed).
> >>>
> >>
> >> Is this approval for the conference, or for the branding/trademark
> stuff?
> >>
> >> Do you have a pointer to the thread where this was discussed?
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> --
> >> NS
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > NS
>
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Yeah, as I mention, sounds totally fine to me. :)
On 23 April 2013 00:21, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 12:07:26AM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Ah, I guess I had not thought about that document in this way. I was more
> > thinking about a list of steps you need to take to organise a small event
> > or conference. I guess that could be put under the "CloudStack Specific
> > Conferences" section.
>
> Let's just describe the required items on that page. Otherwise we're
> duplicating content and causing (more) confusion.
>
> Fair?
>
> >
> >
> > On 23 April 2013 00:01, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:57:54PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > > > I appreciate your fastidiousness! I know the foundation
> documentation can
> > > > be confusing. All the more reason we write up our own guide to this
> and
> > > > stick it on the wiki.
> > >
> > > This is the WIP:
> > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guidelines+%28DRAFT%29
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > NS
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 12:07:26AM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> Ah, I guess I had not thought about that document in this way. I was more
> thinking about a list of steps you need to take to organise a small event
> or conference. I guess that could be put under the "CloudStack Specific
> Conferences" section.
Let's just describe the required items on that page. Otherwise we're
duplicating content and causing (more) confusion.
Fair?
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 00:01, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:57:54PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > > I appreciate your fastidiousness! I know the foundation documentation can
> > > be confusing. All the more reason we write up our own guide to this and
> > > stick it on the wiki.
> >
> > This is the WIP:
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guidelines+%28DRAFT%29
> >
>
>
>
> --
> NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Ah, I guess I had not thought about that document in this way. I was more
thinking about a list of steps you need to take to organise a small event
or conference. I guess that could be put under the "CloudStack Specific
Conferences" section.
On 23 April 2013 00:01, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:57:54PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > I appreciate your fastidiousness! I know the foundation documentation can
> > be confusing. All the more reason we write up our own guide to this and
> > stick it on the wiki.
>
> This is the WIP:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guidelines+%28DRAFT%29
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:57:54PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> I appreciate your fastidiousness! I know the foundation documentation can
> be confusing. All the more reason we write up our own guide to this and
> stick it on the wiki.
This is the WIP:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Trademark+Guidelines+%28DRAFT%29
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Mark,
Sorry to give you a fright!
Karen's email to Trademarks was exactly the sort of thing I was hoping for!
So thanks for that Karen!
I checked my emails for the thread to ConCom you mention, and it's not
there. Most peculiar! I very rarely deleted email. Anyway, I checked the
Foundation's records, and I found a copy. Looks good to me. The only thing
I would have requested is a CC to private@cloudstack.apache.org, so that we
are aware of what's going on.
Those were the only two things I was looking for. And we had one (that was
hidden from me for strange computer reasons!) and we have the other now. So
all is great. :-)
I appreciate your fastidiousness! I know the foundation documentation can
be confusing. All the more reason we write up our own guide to this and
stick it on the wiki.
On 22 April 2013 20:23, Mark Hinkle <Ma...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Noah,
>
> I am in total agreement with doing this right though I am trying to figure
> out what we could have done better. I don't want to sound defensive but
> after following the Concom direction and reading and following the Event
> Branding policy I thought we had done everything we could to do things the
> Apache way. After signing on contract for the venue earlier this month...my
> heart skipped a few beats when I read your email.
>
> Initially the spring CloudStack Collab Conference was going to be
> organized by another community member this spring but they didn't have the
> ability to do so in the shorter timespan. We didn't send to private@ on
> the final discussion because I assumed that everyone on Devel@ was also
> private@ I'll do that going forward.
>
> The note to Concon@ went to them on 3/7 and I got a response with the
> subject RE:Permission for CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA 2013 on
> March 17th from Nick Burch indicating the beginning of lazy consensus.
>
> Since the website went live on Friday so it could be reviewed and it looks
> like we have gotten most of the feedback on the correct attribution of
> trademarks and clarification of the proper application of CloudStack as a
> mark. Karen sent the request to trademarks@ on the 21st to get their
> feedback and we'll make any changes that are requested. The subject is
> "[LOGO] Apache CloudStack Logo Usage - CloudStack Collaboration Conference
> North America 2013" from karen.vuong@citrix.com and has a complete list
> of the ways we plan to use all the Apache trademarks and that was cc'd to
> the private@. We needed to have the website up and decide on the various
> ways we planned to use them before we could show them. We will make
> everything right before promoting it I think there were plenty of
> suggestions over the last 48 hours and they are being implemented.
>
> On the question of who is running it. The intention is to be as
> collaborative as possible we want this to be a community conference not a
> Citrix run event.
> Citrix is covering all the costs of the conference minus any additional
> sponsor contributions. We paid for the venue and are listing as the Diamond
> Sponsor. We are also offering three levels of sponsorship for the
> conference (needs fixed on the website) $10K, $5K, and $1k to try to be as
> inclusive as possible. Since someone has to be the signatory for the venue
> and provide insurance Citrix did that. Sponsors will get lightning talks
> for their sponsorship and logo attribution on the website, conference
> t-shirt and venue. The total cost for the conference is going to be over
> $200K so we want as diverse and varied a group a sponsors as possible
> though we expect the vast majority of the cost is going to be shouldered by
> Citrix, hence the Diamond Sponsorship.
>
> The program is being planned by a group comprised of Chip Childers, VP of
> Apache CloudStack & Sunguard, John Kinsella, Apache CloudStack PMC &
> Stratosec, Joe Brockmeier Apache CloudStack PMC and Citrix, Karen
> Vuong-Citrix and me-Citrix.
>
> The talks are being reviewed and accepted by a committee of committers led
> by Joe Brockmeier and Chip Childers.
>
> At the suggestion of Concom we hired a professional conference producer.
> We are using the OpenBastion to organize things hoping their familiarity
> from running ApacheCon would help make things easier.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:54 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Karen, ignore my request. Despite having just read David's email, I
> didn't
> > tie your comment up to his comment. I have seen the link, and yes, PMC
> > approval for the conference itself seems to be established. Sorry for the
> > noise! :)
> >
> > Also, Mark, just to address your previous comment about "hoops". Sorry if
> > my emails are frustrating. I don't want to be a bother. I just think we
> > ought to do this right. (And trying to figure out what that means
> myself.)
> >
> > I don't think there are any major problems here. If ConCom have already
> > seen this, then that's good. Though, as I mention, I'd like to be able to
> > look up the thread. The only thing I would say here is that
> > private@cloudstack.apache.org should be CCed when reaching out to ConCom
> > and Trademarks, and what have you, just so we're all kept in the loop on
> > this stuff.
> >
> > About the trademarks stuff. I guess my only comment would be that this
> sort
> > of stuff is usually best sorted out before going live. I don't expect
> we'll
> > have any major problems. But the larger the event, the more circumspect
> we
> > should be.
> >
> > I just took a look at the website now, with a critical eye. And I have a
> > few questions, with my "user hat" on:
> >
> > 1) Who is running this conference? It looks to me like Apache CloudStack
> is
> > running it. Is that the case? If so, how is the community being involved?
> > If not, then who is, and what is the relationship to CloudStack?
> >
> > 2) The copyright says "all rights reserved." Not sure where we stand on
> > that sort of thing. At the very least, we may want to add "Apache
> > CloudStack, CloudSTack, and the project logo are trademarks of The Apache
> > Software Foundation" or something.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 21 April 2013 15:43, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Karen,
> >>
> >>
> >> On 21 April 2013 02:48, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 6) PPMC approval - 8 PMC members participated and seemed to
> all
> >>> be for the event (David has confirmed).
> >>>
> >>
> >> Is this approval for the conference, or for the branding/trademark
> stuff?
> >>
> >> Do you have a pointer to the thread where this was discussed?
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> --
> >> NS
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > NS
>
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Mark Hinkle <Ma...@citrix.com>.
Noah,
I am in total agreement with doing this right though I am trying to figure out what we could have done better. I don't want to sound defensive but after following the Concom direction and reading and following the Event Branding policy I thought we had done everything we could to do things the Apache way. After signing on contract for the venue earlier this month...my heart skipped a few beats when I read your email.
Initially the spring CloudStack Collab Conference was going to be organized by another community member this spring but they didn't have the ability to do so in the shorter timespan. We didn't send to private@ on the final discussion because I assumed that everyone on Devel@ was also private@ I'll do that going forward.
The note to Concon@ went to them on 3/7 and I got a response with the subject RE:Permission for CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA 2013 on March 17th from Nick Burch indicating the beginning of lazy consensus.
Since the website went live on Friday so it could be reviewed and it looks like we have gotten most of the feedback on the correct attribution of trademarks and clarification of the proper application of CloudStack as a mark. Karen sent the request to trademarks@ on the 21st to get their feedback and we'll make any changes that are requested. The subject is "[LOGO] Apache CloudStack Logo Usage - CloudStack Collaboration Conference North America 2013" from karen.vuong@citrix.com and has a complete list of the ways we plan to use all the Apache trademarks and that was cc'd to the private@. We needed to have the website up and decide on the various ways we planned to use them before we could show them. We will make everything right before promoting it I think there were plenty of suggestions over the last 48 hours and they are being implemented.
On the question of who is running it. The intention is to be as collaborative as possible we want this to be a community conference not a Citrix run event.
Citrix is covering all the costs of the conference minus any additional sponsor contributions. We paid for the venue and are listing as the Diamond Sponsor. We are also offering three levels of sponsorship for the conference (needs fixed on the website) $10K, $5K, and $1k to try to be as inclusive as possible. Since someone has to be the signatory for the venue and provide insurance Citrix did that. Sponsors will get lightning talks for their sponsorship and logo attribution on the website, conference t-shirt and venue. The total cost for the conference is going to be over $200K so we want as diverse and varied a group a sponsors as possible though we expect the vast majority of the cost is going to be shouldered by Citrix, hence the Diamond Sponsorship.
The program is being planned by a group comprised of Chip Childers, VP of Apache CloudStack & Sunguard, John Kinsella, Apache CloudStack PMC & Stratosec, Joe Brockmeier Apache CloudStack PMC and Citrix, Karen Vuong-Citrix and me-Citrix.
The talks are being reviewed and accepted by a committee of committers led by Joe Brockmeier and Chip Childers.
At the suggestion of Concom we hired a professional conference producer. We are using the OpenBastion to organize things hoping their familiarity from running ApacheCon would help make things easier.
Mark
On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:54 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> Karen, ignore my request. Despite having just read David's email, I didn't
> tie your comment up to his comment. I have seen the link, and yes, PMC
> approval for the conference itself seems to be established. Sorry for the
> noise! :)
>
> Also, Mark, just to address your previous comment about "hoops". Sorry if
> my emails are frustrating. I don't want to be a bother. I just think we
> ought to do this right. (And trying to figure out what that means myself.)
>
> I don't think there are any major problems here. If ConCom have already
> seen this, then that's good. Though, as I mention, I'd like to be able to
> look up the thread. The only thing I would say here is that
> private@cloudstack.apache.org should be CCed when reaching out to ConCom
> and Trademarks, and what have you, just so we're all kept in the loop on
> this stuff.
>
> About the trademarks stuff. I guess my only comment would be that this sort
> of stuff is usually best sorted out before going live. I don't expect we'll
> have any major problems. But the larger the event, the more circumspect we
> should be.
>
> I just took a look at the website now, with a critical eye. And I have a
> few questions, with my "user hat" on:
>
> 1) Who is running this conference? It looks to me like Apache CloudStack is
> running it. Is that the case? If so, how is the community being involved?
> If not, then who is, and what is the relationship to CloudStack?
>
> 2) The copyright says "all rights reserved." Not sure where we stand on
> that sort of thing. At the very least, we may want to add "Apache
> CloudStack, CloudSTack, and the project logo are trademarks of The Apache
> Software Foundation" or something.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 21 April 2013 15:43, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Karen,
>>
>>
>> On 21 April 2013 02:48, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 6) PPMC approval - 8 PMC members participated and seemed to all
>>> be for the event (David has confirmed).
>>>
>>
>> Is this approval for the conference, or for the branding/trademark stuff?
>>
>> Do you have a pointer to the thread where this was discussed?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> --
>> NS
>>
>
>
>
> --
> NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> Yep, specifically:
>
> "In addition to the two public lists, there is also the concom list. This
> is open to all Apache committers, and is privately archived."
>
> Your sub was probably not approved because Ross missed it in his queue. I
> actually recently volunteered to be an extra mod for that list, along with
> two other people, after Ross realised he was the only one. Heh!
>
OK, just tried to resub.
That explains a lot. Ross is a busy guy. Thanks for the explanation!
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Yep, specifically:
"In addition to the two public lists, there is also the concom list. This
is open to all Apache committers, and is privately archived."
Your sub was probably not approved because Ross missed it in his queue. I
actually recently volunteered to be an extra mod for that list, along with
two other people, after Ross realised he was the only one. Heh!
On 21 April 2013 21:37, Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 04:29:53PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hmm. Good point. Though, that depends on how likely ConCom are to turn
> > > around and say "well, it doesn't matter that nobody responded, you
> have to
> > > shut this down now." I think they would be more likely to concede it
> was
> > > their mistake and not pursue it. But, I don't know. I don't even have
> that
> > > much experience with them. I certainly don't speak for them.
> > >
> > > If you want to get involved, I suggest you subscribe to
> > > concom@apache.organd post a message. (It is a private list, but open
> > > to all committers.)
> > > (Admittedly, their list of mailing lists is also quite confusing...)
> > >
> >
> > I don't believe this is the case.
> > I suspect this is a members-only (or members-by-default) list.
> > I am on one or more concom-owned private lists (ApacheCon related),
> > but when I tried subscribing to concom@ back in June it disappeared
> > into the ether and my subscription was never approved by a mod.
> >
> > I suspect that many/most of the president's committers (concom, press,
> > TAC, fundraising, branding, etc) are members only, or at least members
> > only by default. My experience with press@ seems to confirm this.
> >
> > --David
> >
>
> I found this: http://events.apache.org/involved/mailing-lists.html
>
> And I subscribed to concom@a.o (and I believe I was mod-ed in) a few
> minutes ago.
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 04:29:53PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hmm. Good point. Though, that depends on how likely ConCom are to turn
> > around and say "well, it doesn't matter that nobody responded, you have to
> > shut this down now." I think they would be more likely to concede it was
> > their mistake and not pursue it. But, I don't know. I don't even have that
> > much experience with them. I certainly don't speak for them.
> >
> > If you want to get involved, I suggest you subscribe to
> > concom@apache.organd post a message. (It is a private list, but open
> > to all committers.)
> > (Admittedly, their list of mailing lists is also quite confusing...)
> >
>
> I don't believe this is the case.
> I suspect this is a members-only (or members-by-default) list.
> I am on one or more concom-owned private lists (ApacheCon related),
> but when I tried subscribing to concom@ back in June it disappeared
> into the ether and my subscription was never approved by a mod.
>
> I suspect that many/most of the president's committers (concom, press,
> TAC, fundraising, branding, etc) are members only, or at least members
> only by default. My experience with press@ seems to confirm this.
>
> --David
>
I found this: http://events.apache.org/involved/mailing-lists.html
And I subscribed to concom@a.o (and I believe I was mod-ed in) a few minutes ago.
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hmm. Good point. Though, that depends on how likely ConCom are to turn
> around and say "well, it doesn't matter that nobody responded, you have to
> shut this down now." I think they would be more likely to concede it was
> their mistake and not pursue it. But, I don't know. I don't even have that
> much experience with them. I certainly don't speak for them.
>
> If you want to get involved, I suggest you subscribe to
> concom@apache.organd post a message. (It is a private list, but open
> to all committers.)
> (Admittedly, their list of mailing lists is also quite confusing...)
>
I don't believe this is the case.
I suspect this is a members-only (or members-by-default) list.
I am on one or more concom-owned private lists (ApacheCon related),
but when I tried subscribing to concom@ back in June it disappeared
into the ether and my subscription was never approved by a mod.
I suspect that many/most of the president's committers (concom, press,
TAC, fundraising, branding, etc) are members only, or at least members
only by default. My experience with press@ seems to confirm this.
--David
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Hmm. Good point. Though, that depends on how likely ConCom are to turn
around and say "well, it doesn't matter that nobody responded, you have to
shut this down now." I think they would be more likely to concede it was
their mistake and not pursue it. But, I don't know. I don't even have that
much experience with them. I certainly don't speak for them.
If you want to get involved, I suggest you subscribe to
concom@apache.organd post a message. (It is a private list, but open
to all committers.)
(Admittedly, their list of mailing lists is also quite confusing...)
On 21 April 2013 20:43, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013, at 12:17 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > I wouldn't worry too much about not getting an ACK. As Ross points out,
> > it's a good enough sign that nobody cares enough to object. Which is, of
> > course, what we call lazy consensus. Which is a really great social hack,
> > if you ask me.
>
> In general, I agree that lazy consensus is great for a lot of decisions.
> "I'm going to do X to the Website," or "I'm merging a new feature," both
> of which allow the community to review / suggest changes, etc. Also,
> both things can easily be rolled back with revision control.
>
> Planning events, on the other hand... If I'm spending money to put on an
> event, I'd really like at least an ACK if I need to get permission (or
> lack of refusal) to move forward.
>
> What's the process for getting on ConCom? If it's so short-handed that
> even ack'ing a request is problematic, I'd like to help out.
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013, at 12:17 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> I wouldn't worry too much about not getting an ACK. As Ross points out,
> it's a good enough sign that nobody cares enough to object. Which is, of
> course, what we call lazy consensus. Which is a really great social hack,
> if you ask me.
In general, I agree that lazy consensus is great for a lot of decisions.
"I'm going to do X to the Website," or "I'm merging a new feature," both
of which allow the community to review / suggest changes, etc. Also,
both things can easily be rolled back with revision control.
Planning events, on the other hand... If I'm spending money to put on an
event, I'd really like at least an ACK if I need to get permission (or
lack of refusal) to move forward.
What's the process for getting on ConCom? If it's so short-handed that
even ack'ing a request is problematic, I'd like to help out.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Most of the Apache policy stuff is actually quite light weight. But I
certainly remember it feeling heavy and bureaucratic when I was getting
used to it. I think you can broadly (and I've not thought about this for
more than a few seconds, so judge accordingly) split policy into two
categories. Things that are designed to allow groups of people to get stuff
done, and thing which are designed to make sure that the right groups of
people are notified of what is going on. And actually, the first depends on
the last.
I wouldn't worry too much about not getting an ACK. As Ross points out,
it's a good enough sign that nobody cares enough to object. Which is, of
course, what we call lazy consensus. Which is a really great social hack,
if you ask me. Voice your plans, and if nobody speaks up within a certain
amount of time, then you're free to just go ahead. (The other part of the
"getting stuff done" category revolves around how consensus is built, etc,
etc. No need to go into that now.)
The second category (making sure the appropriate people are made aware of
things) is crucial for the first one to work. It's fine for us to operate
on the principal that you say you're gonna do something and if nobody
objects you do it, but only if you say you're gonna do that thing to
the appropriate people _so they have a chance to_. If that makes sense?
Another way of framing my comments on this thread would be: I have no
problem with the conference. In fact, I think it looks great! A
really positive thing for the community and the project! But I am trying to
make sure that the appropriate people see what we're planning to do so that
we can do the whole "nobody raised any objections so we can go ahead with
this" thing.
Like I said, I actually think this is quite a lightweight system, once it's
internalised. I actually can't imagine anything more lightweight than just
having to announce your actions before you do them in case anybody wants to
object. ;)
I agree that policy is often... Well, it seems to vary depending on who you
speak to. We could document it better. And that's actually something that I
think a few people have been talking about recently. But you're right. In
the absence of data, do what you think is right. Be bold! And much better
to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission.
(Though, I would note that I don't think announcing your intention is a
form of permission seeking. Nor do I think anybody on this thread needs
to apologise! We're still figuring this stuff out as a project.)
I was actually thinking it might be a good idea to document this ourselves
somewhere. So that we have a simple to follow checklist of things to do
when planning these sorts of things. And you can just run down it as you go.
On 21 April 2013 16:46, Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:54 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Karen, ignore my request. Despite having just read David's email, I
> didn't
> > tie your comment up to his comment. I have seen the link, and yes, PMC
> > approval for the conference itself seems to be established. Sorry for the
> > noise! :)
> >
> > Also, Mark, just to address your previous comment about "hoops". Sorry if
> > my emails are frustrating. I don't want to be a bother. I just think we
> > ought to do this right. (And trying to figure out what that means
> myself.)
> >
> > I don't think there are any major problems here. If ConCom have already
> > seen this, then that's good. Though, as I mention, I'd like to be able to
> > look up the thread. The only thing I would say here is that
> > private@cloudstack.apache.org should be CCed when reaching out to ConCom
> > and Trademarks, and what have you, just so we're all kept in the loop on
> > this stuff.
> >
>
> A side note in this overall thread. I sent an email to concom about two
> events I requested approval for. I got not reply, not ack.
> Then I saw a reply from concom to one of Noah's emails and this told me
> that they are not as organized as what they would like to be.
>
> We have to strike a balance between being perfect Apache citizens which
> sometimes strikes me as being overly bureaucratic with policies all over
> the place and ack and approval and consensus on every single action and
> being stale…
>
> Just my thoughts. If there is no evil I better ask for forgiveness than
> permission…(sometimes)
>
> -sebastien
>
>
> > About the trademarks stuff. I guess my only comment would be that this
> sort
> > of stuff is usually best sorted out before going live. I don't expect
> we'll
> > have any major problems. But the larger the event, the more circumspect
> we
> > should be.
> >
> > I just took a look at the website now, with a critical eye. And I have a
> > few questions, with my "user hat" on:
> >
> > 1) Who is running this conference? It looks to me like Apache CloudStack
> is
> > running it. Is that the case? If so, how is the community being involved?
> > If not, then who is, and what is the relationship to CloudStack?
> >
> > 2) The copyright says "all rights reserved." Not sure where we stand on
> > that sort of thing. At the very least, we may want to add "Apache
> > CloudStack, CloudSTack, and the project logo are trademarks of The Apache
> > Software Foundation" or something.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 21 April 2013 15:43, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Karen,
> >>
> >>
> >> On 21 April 2013 02:48, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 6) PPMC approval - 8 PMC members participated and seemed to
> all
> >>> be for the event (David has confirmed).
> >>>
> >>
> >> Is this approval for the conference, or for the branding/trademark
> stuff?
> >>
> >> Do you have a pointer to the thread where this was discussed?
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> --
> >> NS
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > NS
>
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Sebastien Goasguen <ru...@gmail.com>.
On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:54 AM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> Karen, ignore my request. Despite having just read David's email, I didn't
> tie your comment up to his comment. I have seen the link, and yes, PMC
> approval for the conference itself seems to be established. Sorry for the
> noise! :)
>
> Also, Mark, just to address your previous comment about "hoops". Sorry if
> my emails are frustrating. I don't want to be a bother. I just think we
> ought to do this right. (And trying to figure out what that means myself.)
>
> I don't think there are any major problems here. If ConCom have already
> seen this, then that's good. Though, as I mention, I'd like to be able to
> look up the thread. The only thing I would say here is that
> private@cloudstack.apache.org should be CCed when reaching out to ConCom
> and Trademarks, and what have you, just so we're all kept in the loop on
> this stuff.
>
A side note in this overall thread. I sent an email to concom about two events I requested approval for. I got not reply, not ack.
Then I saw a reply from concom to one of Noah's emails and this told me that they are not as organized as what they would like to be.
We have to strike a balance between being perfect Apache citizens which sometimes strikes me as being overly bureaucratic with policies all over the place and ack and approval and consensus on every single action and being stale…
Just my thoughts. If there is no evil I better ask for forgiveness than permission…(sometimes)
-sebastien
> About the trademarks stuff. I guess my only comment would be that this sort
> of stuff is usually best sorted out before going live. I don't expect we'll
> have any major problems. But the larger the event, the more circumspect we
> should be.
>
> I just took a look at the website now, with a critical eye. And I have a
> few questions, with my "user hat" on:
>
> 1) Who is running this conference? It looks to me like Apache CloudStack is
> running it. Is that the case? If so, how is the community being involved?
> If not, then who is, and what is the relationship to CloudStack?
>
> 2) The copyright says "all rights reserved." Not sure where we stand on
> that sort of thing. At the very least, we may want to add "Apache
> CloudStack, CloudSTack, and the project logo are trademarks of The Apache
> Software Foundation" or something.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 21 April 2013 15:43, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Karen,
>>
>>
>> On 21 April 2013 02:48, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 6) PPMC approval - 8 PMC members participated and seemed to all
>>> be for the event (David has confirmed).
>>>
>>
>> Is this approval for the conference, or for the branding/trademark stuff?
>>
>> Do you have a pointer to the thread where this was discussed?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> --
>> NS
>>
>
>
>
> --
> NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Karen, ignore my request. Despite having just read David's email, I didn't
tie your comment up to his comment. I have seen the link, and yes, PMC
approval for the conference itself seems to be established. Sorry for the
noise! :)
Also, Mark, just to address your previous comment about "hoops". Sorry if
my emails are frustrating. I don't want to be a bother. I just think we
ought to do this right. (And trying to figure out what that means myself.)
I don't think there are any major problems here. If ConCom have already
seen this, then that's good. Though, as I mention, I'd like to be able to
look up the thread. The only thing I would say here is that
private@cloudstack.apache.org should be CCed when reaching out to ConCom
and Trademarks, and what have you, just so we're all kept in the loop on
this stuff.
About the trademarks stuff. I guess my only comment would be that this sort
of stuff is usually best sorted out before going live. I don't expect we'll
have any major problems. But the larger the event, the more circumspect we
should be.
I just took a look at the website now, with a critical eye. And I have a
few questions, with my "user hat" on:
1) Who is running this conference? It looks to me like Apache CloudStack is
running it. Is that the case? If so, how is the community being involved?
If not, then who is, and what is the relationship to CloudStack?
2) The copyright says "all rights reserved." Not sure where we stand on
that sort of thing. At the very least, we may want to add "Apache
CloudStack, CloudSTack, and the project logo are trademarks of The Apache
Software Foundation" or something.
On 21 April 2013 15:43, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> Karen,
>
>
> On 21 April 2013 02:48, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> 6) PPMC approval - 8 PMC members participated and seemed to all
>> be for the event (David has confirmed).
>>
>
> Is this approval for the conference, or for the branding/trademark stuff?
>
> Do you have a pointer to the thread where this was discussed?
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> NS
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Karen,
On 21 April 2013 02:48, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> 6) PPMC approval - 8 PMC members participated and seemed to all
> be for the event (David has confirmed).
>
Is this approval for the conference, or for the branding/trademark stuff?
Do you have a pointer to the thread where this was discussed?
Thanks!
--
NS
RE: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com>.
Hi all,
David and Noah - thank you for the feedback and pointers. It is much appreciated and very helpful.
Mark - thanks for confirming that you have received the approval from ConCom.
I will do the following:
1) Since the Apache CloudStack logo will be used on www.cloudstackcollab.org<http://www.cloudstackcollab.org>, I will have the web team link the logo to http://cloudstack.apache.org. Karen to loop in trademarks@ and CC private@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org> detailing how the logo and other trademarks are used throughout the conference. (Including website, invitations, lanyards, t-shirts or any other swag, booths, etc.) and the steps we have taken to make sure they are used responsibly.
2) Add a footer on www.cloudstackcollab.org<http://www.cloudstackcollab.org> - 'Apache, CloudStack, Apache CloudStack, and the Cloud Monkey are trademarks or registered trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation'
3) Have the ASF listed as a community partner.
4) Add a paragraph with a brief description of Apache CloudStack to www.cloudstackcollab.org<http://www.cloudstackcollab.org> on the 'About page' and landing page. This will also include a link back to the Apache project's home page (http://cloudstack.apache.org/), linked from the "Apache CloudStack" wording.
About Apache CloudStack
Apache CloudStack is open source software designed to deploy and manage large networks of virtual machines, as a highly available, highly scalable Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) cloud computing platform. CloudStack is used by a number of service providers to offer public cloud services, and by many companies to provide an on-premises (private) cloud offering, or as part of a hybrid cloud solution.
5) Approval from ComCon was done in February 2013 (Mark has confirmed).
6) PPMC approval - 8 PMC members participated and seemed to all be for the event (David has confirmed).
If anything else comes to mind, please feel free to share. Thanks!
Best regards,
Karen
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Hinkle [mailto:Mark.Hinkle@citrix.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2013 4:07 PM
To: marketing@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
I got permission for the conference back in February from ConCom. Nick B.
asked that we meet the requirements to have reps from more than two organizations on the planning committee. I thought we sent it to private but those archives aren't trasnparent so I cat confirm we also discussed on the public list with no objections.
We have included Chip Childers, John Kinsella, David Nalley and Joe Brockmeier from the PMC to fulfill the requirements of having members from multiple organizations on the planning committee.
We met on Friday and agreed we'd make the site live and let the marketing list know that it was live so we could get feedback and make sure all trademarks are applied properly. We agreed to make sure any changes happened as soon as possible if there were errors.
I thought I jumped through every possible hoop here but if there's something I missed I'd be glad to do something else.
Mark
On 4/20/13 6:40 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us>> wrote:
>On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> I've not been involved in many conferences related to Apache
>>products, so my advice here is not representative of policy. Just
>>what seems like might be a good idea based on what I know.
>>
>> Ideally, the plans for this conference would have been run past the
>>CloudStack PMC, ConCom, and Brand before we went live with it.
>>Conferences
>> need approval from these groups. But what's done is done.
>>
>> However, it might be a good idea to run it past them now, as we do
>>need to establish that approval retroactively.
>>
>> Perhaps send a message to trademarks@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>, CCing
>>private@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>, detailing the ways in which you are
>>using the Apache CloudStack trademarks, and the steps you have taken
>>to make sure they are used responsibly.
>>
>> Perhaps send a message to concom@apache.org<ma...@apache.org>, CCing
>>private@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org>, detailing the plans for the conference.
>>(I
>> am not sure what specific information ConCom are looking for. But see
>>Ross Gardler's recent thread on dev@cloudstack.apache.org<ma...@cloudstack.apache.org> for more
>>context.
>>For
>> smaller events it looks like this sort of thing is not important, but
>>ConCom certainly need to be involved for any conference level events.)
>>
>> There's an active thread about how PMC oversight works for trademarks
>>and events and what have you, that I haven't followed up on yet.
>>(Sorry about
>> that.) But until we have something ratified, I am assuming that
>>approval for things like this can be done via lazy consensus. i.e.
>>This thread, and two separates threads as detailed above, copying the
>>PMC, should be enough.
>> (Assuming nobody raises objections within 72 hours.)
>>
>> Chip, or anyone else from the PMC, feel free to correct me on any of
>>this!
>>
>
>My understanding based on this thread:
>http://cloudstack.markmail.org/thread/eufkzvnt6v3mz4n6
>
>is that concom was pinged back in February, but I can't verify as I am
>not on concom and can't peruse the archives. In the referenced thread,
>8 PMC members participated and seemed to all be for the event, so I
>don't think that PMC approval is an issue.
>
>--David
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Hi Mark,
What was the subject/date of the thread with ConCom? I was unable to find
it in my archives. (Likely an error on my part.)
Thanks,
On 21 April 2013 00:07, Mark Hinkle <Ma...@citrix.com> wrote:
> I got permission for the conference back in February from ConCom. Nick B.
> asked that we meet the requirements to have reps from more than two
> organizations on the planning committee. I thought we sent it to private
> but those archives aren't trasnparent so I cat confirm we also discussed
> on the public list with no objections.
>
> We have included Chip Childers, John Kinsella, David Nalley and Joe
> Brockmeier from the PMC to fulfill the requirements of having members from
> multiple organizations on the planning committee.
>
> We met on Friday and agreed we'd make the site live and let the marketing
> list know that it was live so we could get feedback and make sure all
> trademarks are applied properly. We agreed to make sure any changes
> happened as soon as possible if there were errors.
>
> I thought I jumped through every possible hoop here but if there's
> something I missed I'd be glad to do something else.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
> On 4/20/13 6:40 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> I've not been involved in many conferences related to Apache products,
> >>so
> >> my advice here is not representative of policy. Just what seems like
> >>might
> >> be a good idea based on what I know.
> >>
> >> Ideally, the plans for this conference would have been run past the
> >> CloudStack PMC, ConCom, and Brand before we went live with it.
> >>Conferences
> >> need approval from these groups. But what's done is done.
> >>
> >> However, it might be a good idea to run it past them now, as we do need
> >>to
> >> establish that approval retroactively.
> >>
> >> Perhaps send a message to trademarks@apache.org, CCing
> >> private@cloudstack.apache.org, detailing the ways in which you are
> using
> >> the Apache CloudStack trademarks, and the steps you have taken to make
> >>sure
> >> they are used responsibly.
> >>
> >> Perhaps send a message to concom@apache.org, CCing
> >> private@cloudstack.apache.org, detailing the plans for the conference.
> >>(I
> >> am not sure what specific information ConCom are looking for. But see
> >>Ross
> >> Gardler's recent thread on dev@cloudstack.apache.org for more context.
> >>For
> >> smaller events it looks like this sort of thing is not important, but
> >> ConCom certainly need to be involved for any conference level events.)
> >>
> >> There's an active thread about how PMC oversight works for trademarks
> >>and
> >> events and what have you, that I haven't followed up on yet. (Sorry
> >>about
> >> that.) But until we have something ratified, I am assuming that approval
> >> for things like this can be done via lazy consensus. i.e. This thread,
> >>and
> >> two separates threads as detailed above, copying the PMC, should be
> >>enough.
> >> (Assuming nobody raises objections within 72 hours.)
> >>
> >> Chip, or anyone else from the PMC, feel free to correct me on any of
> >>this!
> >>
> >
> >My understanding based on this thread:
> >http://cloudstack.markmail.org/thread/eufkzvnt6v3mz4n6
> >
> >is that concom was pinged back in February, but I can't verify as I am
> >not on concom and can't peruse the archives. In the referenced thread,
> >8 PMC members participated and seemed to all be for the event, so I
> >don't think that PMC approval is an issue.
> >
> >--David
>
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Mark Hinkle <Ma...@citrix.com>.
I got permission for the conference back in February from ConCom. Nick B.
asked that we meet the requirements to have reps from more than two
organizations on the planning committee. I thought we sent it to private
but those archives aren't trasnparent so I cat confirm we also discussed
on the public list with no objections.
We have included Chip Childers, John Kinsella, David Nalley and Joe
Brockmeier from the PMC to fulfill the requirements of having members from
multiple organizations on the planning committee.
We met on Friday and agreed we'd make the site live and let the marketing
list know that it was live so we could get feedback and make sure all
trademarks are applied properly. We agreed to make sure any changes
happened as soon as possible if there were errors.
I thought I jumped through every possible hoop here but if there's
something I missed I'd be glad to do something else.
Mark
On 4/20/13 6:40 PM, "David Nalley" <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I've not been involved in many conferences related to Apache products,
>>so
>> my advice here is not representative of policy. Just what seems like
>>might
>> be a good idea based on what I know.
>>
>> Ideally, the plans for this conference would have been run past the
>> CloudStack PMC, ConCom, and Brand before we went live with it.
>>Conferences
>> need approval from these groups. But what's done is done.
>>
>> However, it might be a good idea to run it past them now, as we do need
>>to
>> establish that approval retroactively.
>>
>> Perhaps send a message to trademarks@apache.org, CCing
>> private@cloudstack.apache.org, detailing the ways in which you are using
>> the Apache CloudStack trademarks, and the steps you have taken to make
>>sure
>> they are used responsibly.
>>
>> Perhaps send a message to concom@apache.org, CCing
>> private@cloudstack.apache.org, detailing the plans for the conference.
>>(I
>> am not sure what specific information ConCom are looking for. But see
>>Ross
>> Gardler's recent thread on dev@cloudstack.apache.org for more context.
>>For
>> smaller events it looks like this sort of thing is not important, but
>> ConCom certainly need to be involved for any conference level events.)
>>
>> There's an active thread about how PMC oversight works for trademarks
>>and
>> events and what have you, that I haven't followed up on yet. (Sorry
>>about
>> that.) But until we have something ratified, I am assuming that approval
>> for things like this can be done via lazy consensus. i.e. This thread,
>>and
>> two separates threads as detailed above, copying the PMC, should be
>>enough.
>> (Assuming nobody raises objections within 72 hours.)
>>
>> Chip, or anyone else from the PMC, feel free to correct me on any of
>>this!
>>
>
>My understanding based on this thread:
>http://cloudstack.markmail.org/thread/eufkzvnt6v3mz4n6
>
>is that concom was pinged back in February, but I can't verify as I am
>not on concom and can't peruse the archives. In the referenced thread,
>8 PMC members participated and seemed to all be for the event, so I
>don't think that PMC approval is an issue.
>
>--David
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> I've not been involved in many conferences related to Apache products, so
> my advice here is not representative of policy. Just what seems like might
> be a good idea based on what I know.
>
> Ideally, the plans for this conference would have been run past the
> CloudStack PMC, ConCom, and Brand before we went live with it. Conferences
> need approval from these groups. But what's done is done.
>
> However, it might be a good idea to run it past them now, as we do need to
> establish that approval retroactively.
>
> Perhaps send a message to trademarks@apache.org, CCing
> private@cloudstack.apache.org, detailing the ways in which you are using
> the Apache CloudStack trademarks, and the steps you have taken to make sure
> they are used responsibly.
>
> Perhaps send a message to concom@apache.org, CCing
> private@cloudstack.apache.org, detailing the plans for the conference. (I
> am not sure what specific information ConCom are looking for. But see Ross
> Gardler's recent thread on dev@cloudstack.apache.org for more context. For
> smaller events it looks like this sort of thing is not important, but
> ConCom certainly need to be involved for any conference level events.)
>
> There's an active thread about how PMC oversight works for trademarks and
> events and what have you, that I haven't followed up on yet. (Sorry about
> that.) But until we have something ratified, I am assuming that approval
> for things like this can be done via lazy consensus. i.e. This thread, and
> two separates threads as detailed above, copying the PMC, should be enough.
> (Assuming nobody raises objections within 72 hours.)
>
> Chip, or anyone else from the PMC, feel free to correct me on any of this!
>
My understanding based on this thread:
http://cloudstack.markmail.org/thread/eufkzvnt6v3mz4n6
is that concom was pinged back in February, but I can't verify as I am
not on concom and can't peruse the archives. In the referenced thread,
8 PMC members participated and seemed to all be for the event, so I
don't think that PMC approval is an issue.
--David
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
I've not been involved in many conferences related to Apache products, so
my advice here is not representative of policy. Just what seems like might
be a good idea based on what I know.
Ideally, the plans for this conference would have been run past the
CloudStack PMC, ConCom, and Brand before we went live with it. Conferences
need approval from these groups. But what's done is done.
However, it might be a good idea to run it past them now, as we do need to
establish that approval retroactively.
Perhaps send a message to trademarks@apache.org, CCing
private@cloudstack.apache.org, detailing the ways in which you are using
the Apache CloudStack trademarks, and the steps you have taken to make sure
they are used responsibly.
Perhaps send a message to concom@apache.org, CCing
private@cloudstack.apache.org, detailing the plans for the conference. (I
am not sure what specific information ConCom are looking for. But see Ross
Gardler's recent thread on dev@cloudstack.apache.org for more context. For
smaller events it looks like this sort of thing is not important, but
ConCom certainly need to be involved for any conference level events.)
There's an active thread about how PMC oversight works for trademarks and
events and what have you, that I haven't followed up on yet. (Sorry about
that.) But until we have something ratified, I am assuming that approval
for things like this can be done via lazy consensus. i.e. This thread, and
two separates threads as detailed above, copying the PMC, should be enough.
(Assuming nobody raises objections within 72 hours.)
Chip, or anyone else from the PMC, feel free to correct me on any of this!
On 20 April 2013 21:37, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The website for the CloudStack Collaboration Conference North America
> 2013 went up yesterday. Registration will open on Monday, April 22nd at
> 9:00am PT.
> >
> > You may take a look at the website here: http://cloudstackcollab.org/
> >
> > I've requested for the web team to change the logo to the current Apache
> CloudStack logo and that will be done before Monday 9:00am.
> >
> > I would welcome any feedback or suggestions . Thanks!
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Karen
> >
>
> Hi Karen:
>
> In general it looks great.
>
> So you are using the Apache CloudStack logo - and if you continue to
> do so, that will need to link to http://cloudstack.apache.org [1] That
> said, it may be better to develop a cloudstack collab conference logo
> instead. [5] The Hadoop cons seem to run afoul of this, but CouchDB
> and Cassandra cons do not. If you really want to use the logo, we
> probably need to loop in trademarks@.
>
> I'd personally prefer a footer that says 'Apache, CloudStack, Apache
> CloudStack, and the Cloud Monkey are trademarks or registered
> trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation' See Hadoop World's
> footer for an example. [2]
>
> I know we don't yet have a sponsor listing up yet, but we need to
> ensure that the ASF is listed as a community partner [3]
>
> We need to add a paragraph that explains what Apache CloudStack is at
> a minimum to the About page, but preferably also to the landing page.
> That paragraph should include a brief description of Apache
> CloudStack. This must also include a link back to the Apache project's
> home page, linked from the "Apache CloudStack" wording. [4]
>
>
> --David
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#integrateswith
> [2] http://www.hadoopworld.com/
> [3] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/events.html#partner
> [4] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/events.html#naming
> [5] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/events.html#graphics
>
--
NS
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The website for the CloudStack Collaboration Conference North America 2013 went up yesterday. Registration will open on Monday, April 22nd at 9:00am PT.
>
> You may take a look at the website here: http://cloudstackcollab.org/
>
> I've requested for the web team to change the logo to the current Apache CloudStack logo and that will be done before Monday 9:00am.
>
> I would welcome any feedback or suggestions . Thanks!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Karen
>
Hi Karen:
In general it looks great.
So you are using the Apache CloudStack logo - and if you continue to
do so, that will need to link to http://cloudstack.apache.org [1] That
said, it may be better to develop a cloudstack collab conference logo
instead. [5] The Hadoop cons seem to run afoul of this, but CouchDB
and Cassandra cons do not. If you really want to use the logo, we
probably need to loop in trademarks@.
I'd personally prefer a footer that says 'Apache, CloudStack, Apache
CloudStack, and the Cloud Monkey are trademarks or registered
trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation' See Hadoop World's
footer for an example. [2]
I know we don't yet have a sponsor listing up yet, but we need to
ensure that the ASF is listed as a community partner [3]
We need to add a paragraph that explains what Apache CloudStack is at
a minimum to the About page, but preferably also to the landing page.
That paragraph should include a brief description of Apache
CloudStack. This must also include a link back to the Apache project's
home page, linked from the "Apache CloudStack" wording. [4]
--David
[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#integrateswith
[2] http://www.hadoopworld.com/
[3] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/events.html#partner
[4] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/events.html#naming
[5] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/events.html#graphics
Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
I suddenly thought "Oh no! What if this has stuff has already happened! I
should check my mail archives!" I see your email to trademarks@ dated April
18th. I note, however, that it only covers the use of the logo on the
conference invitation.
I believe it might be necessary to detail how the logo and other trademarks
are used throughout the conference. (Including website,
invitations, lanyards, t-shirts or any other swag, booths, that sort of
thing...)
Apologies if I have missed anything else in my email!
On 20 April 2013 21:00, Karen Vuong <ka...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The website for the CloudStack Collaboration Conference North America 2013
> went up yesterday. Registration will open on Monday, April 22nd at 9:00am
> PT.
>
> You may take a look at the website here: http://cloudstackcollab.org/
>
> I've requested for the web team to change the logo to the current Apache
> CloudStack logo and that will be done before Monday 9:00am.
>
> I would welcome any feedback or suggestions . Thanks!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Karen
>
>
--
NS