Thank you so much Rich for the kind words and expression, I highly appreciate your constant guidance! :-)
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 8:13 PM Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: > > Some responses/thoughts inline. Thank you, Swapnil, for your > constructive engagement in this conversation. I *hugely* appreciate you > taking on this initiative, and your willingness to hear, and respond > professionally to, criticism. > > On 12/5/19 12:31 AM, Swapnil M Mane wrote: > > Thank you all for your constant support and guidance in the ALC [1] > > initiative. > > > > Thank you so much Rich, Daniel, Issac, Shane, and David for spending > > time and energy to share your > > thoughts, we highly appreciate it. All the points you mentioned are > > very important. > > > > Dear team, > > I would like to discuss with you on three critical points (raised by > > Rich), here is the reference to mail threads ( > > https://s.apache.org/6hfel , https://s.apache.org/wr6ah ) > > > > 1. Process of forming ALC Chapter. > > 2. How we make sure that we are not having people use the Apache name > > to promote messages that are not *our* message. > > 3. Rules and regulations for ALC Chapter. > > > > I am having some proposals to address these issues and need your kind > > help in validating and improving it. All the below are just my > > thoughts and I need your kind inputs and approval on this. > > > > ## 1. Process of forming ALC Chapter. > > > > Currently, we have process to establish an ALC is, simply send mail on > > ComDev list as mentioned at https://s.apache.org/apply-to-setup-alc > > > > Should we add the following clauses to it? > > > > -- Instead of sending mail on dev@community.apache.org, the mail > > should be sent to ComDev PMC at priv...@community.apache.org > > -- To form an ALC, there should be at least 2 committers or 1 ASF member. > > -- The ComDev PMC will look into each request and then took > > the decision on forming the ALC Chapter. > > -- Also as Rich suggests above, we can also assign one mentor to guide ALC. > > (Thank you @Issac & @David for sharing your thoughts on this point). > > I kind of like the transparency of sending the request to the public > list. We have already seen how this brings additional > participants/attendees to light. > > I believe (and we might want to run this by the board for confirmation) > that for the PMC to create a new entity, with rights to use the Apache > name and trademarks, the PMC must actually vote on it, which should > probably happen on the private list, as such a vote might contain > personal remarks about the people starting the ALC in question ("I don't > trust that Daniel guy, you know how he is!") Makes perfect sense, thanks! > > I think, before we authorize any more of these groups, we should write a > formal proposal of how we are planning to vet these groups, and send it > to the board list. (Good news: most of the board members are here, so > this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.) Sure, thanks for raising this point, here is the https://s.apache.org/establish-alc-chapter first draft. (As mentioned in my previous mail, everyone please feel free to share your inputs). > > My personal opinion is that we should require an ASF member to be > involved, at least initially, and perhaps relax that when we revisit in, > say, six months. Very nice idea to revisiting it after six months, liked it! Since many of the issues mentioned in the initial thread are almost getting sorted. We are only having variable opinions on minimum count on ASF or PMC members in ALC Chapter. I tried to incorporate all the suggestions from everyone and prepared https://s.apache.org/establish-alc-chapter document. Please refer to my previous mail, https://s.apache.org/bvmwv from line "Many of the issues mentioned...." (reshared again for everyone's quick reference) > > > ## 2. How we make sure that we are not having people use the Apache name > > to promote messages that are not *our* message. > > > > *Very critical & important point!* > > The ALC Indore [2] team was fortunate that we have 4 Committers, 2 PMC > > members and the rest members are very active contributors to various > > Apache Projects, so we feel the Apache within us. > > > > But it may/will not be the case with the new ALC Chapter, so here are > > some solutions to address this issue. > > > > -- We worked on preparing some guidelines for ALC Chapter to execute > > the event, https://s.apache.org/alc-guidelines > > (I need your kind help in reviewing it.) > > This could help us in keeping track of actions taken by ALC and > > approving the event before executing it. > > This is all really great stuff. We should also coordinate with the > Training project (incubating) with content that can be reused. Super, our Training project is a nice option. > > > > @Daniel, this is exactly like you proposed, thoughts travel! :-) > > > > -- If we will have at least 2 committers of 1 ASF member than the > > chances of misuse of our name will be reduced. > > I will echo a statement made elsewhere (may have even been another > list). We (ComDev) actively encourage project to hand out committer > rights very generously. As such, many committers are completely > unfamiliar with the larger Foundation. My vote (as a PMC member) is that > we require at least one ASF member, at least initially, as I have said > above. > > > > > -- We can make a list of the FAQs by the audience, and document it so > > that every ALC chapter will have the answer to frequently asked > > questions by the audience. > > +1 > > > > > -- We are documenting various information at > > https://s.apache.org/ALC-Resources , this will also give the idea to > > ALC Chapter what types of events and content they can present to the > > audience. > > All really good stuff. > > > > > ## 3. Rule and regulation for ALC Chapter > > > > Although we should not have a hard list of rules and regulation but we > > should have some rules, that will help us in managing the ALC > > initiative because with time we will grow like currently there is 900+ > > Google Developer Group [3] and 120+ Facebook Developer Circle [4] > > present. > > So, to manage and scale the ALC initiative, we should have some > > rules/guidelines we prepared. Here are these rules/guidelines. > > > > -- There will be a single ALC chapter per town/city. > > > > -- The ALC members should follow the Apache code of conduct, > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct.html > > > > -- It’s strictly prohibited to use ALC Chapter for profit or promoting > > any company or personal agenda. > > > > -- If any ALC Chapter is inactive for 3 months, it will be dissolved > > after communication with members of that ALC chapter because we are > > having strictly one ALC chapter in a town/city. > > > > -- The ALC Chapter shares the status report (e.g. ALC Indore reports - > > https://s.apache.org/alc-indore-reports) to ComDev in every three > > months. > > The report includes details on the activities performed by ALC Chapter > > and it's impact. > > Here is the index page for reports from each ALC > > https://s.apache.org/alc-reports > > And the report prepared by ALC Indore for their > > August to October 2019 activities is > > https://s.apache.org/alc-indore-report-aug-oct-2019 > > > > -- Each Chapter should follow ALC Guideline (as mentioned, need your > > help in reviewing it) https://s.apache.org/alc-guidelines to execute > > any event. > > I don't have strong opinions beyond "fewer rules is better". Whatever we > come up with here, we should at least mention in whatever we send to the > board. > > > > > -- Also as @Shane mentioned, we can also use some of the concepts and > > rationale mentioned at > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/events > > (Below is the statement from our Event Branding Policy we have already > > included as suggested by from Joan previously) > > ======= > > The use of Apache marks in any events run by third parties must be > > approved by VP, Brand Management or the VP of the relevant Apache > > project > > ======= > > Shane, this point was raised by Joan Touzet in September > > https://s.apache.org/95wu0 , so we had a discussion on this and > > followed this process and included it in > > https://s.apache.org/alc-guidelines > > As you said, if needed we can add more points from > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/events > > > > > > I feel very proud to be the part of the Apache family and in the past 6 > > years every day, the ASF people inspired me to do better. And the > > great things we are doing together surprise me regularly. > > Thank you much for your love and support! > > > > Please feel free to share your comments and thoughts. > > > > [1] https://s.apache.org/alc > > [2] https://s.apache.org/alc-indore > > [3] https://developers.google.com/programs/community/gdg/ > > [4] https://developers.facebook.com/developercircles/ > > > > > > Best regards, > > Swapnil M Mane, > > www.apache.org > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 4:53 AM David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 3:15 PM Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> I've made two posts on this list in the past couple of days regarding > >>> the rising ACL effort and my concerns about it. > >>> > >>> I *desperately* want this kind of grass-roots enthusiast community > >>> effort. I do NOT want to kill it. But I've learned from Fedora user > >>> groups that allowing any random stranger to start up a group, using our > >>> Trademarks, to promote whatever message comes into their head, is > >>> *going* to bite us in the butt, sooner rather than later. > >>> > >> > >> I haven't been involved with Fedora in a long while, but there were in > >> early days a real struggle for how to control messaging and who could > >> speak for Fedora, and how events could be handled, etc. Did the > >> community own it or did Red Hat? > >> > >> Fedora had (at least back then) a relatively scalable and > >> self-policing group called the "Ambassadors" that leveraged messaging > >> and collateral provided by the Fedora Marketing Project to talk about > >> Fedora in a unified fashion. There were requirements about prior > >> activity and some barrier to entry to become an Ambassador, but it > >> belonging to that group seems somewhat analogous to membership at the > >> ASF (you had to have been involved in some other aspect of Fedora, you > >> had to demonstrate some knowledge of Fedora's principles, etc) > >> > >> So perhaps being 'sponsored' or 'championed' by a member is the > >> threshold for running an event. Any problems that arise can be > >> policed from there because we know there's a member we can talk to. > >> > >> YMMV - I have no idea the current state of the Ambassador program at > >> Fedora and whether it's considered a success of failure. > >> > >> --David > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > > > > -- > Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com > http://rcbowen.com/ > @rbowen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
