Board reports are submitted by adding them to the agenda in SVN. There is no requirement to submit them to board@ as well, notifications go to a list.
As you note we are not a PMC. VP Diversity reports to Prez and thus reports are submitted to the Prez. There is no need for the VP to consult with the rest of us. That said, in order to build a strong team it would be wise to ensure that the team is aware of what is being reported. Being involved in writing the report is less important as it should be reflecting what we already see on list. Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> ________________________________ From: Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 2:01:09 PM To: [email protected]; Naomi Slater Subject: Re: Concerns about process Thanks for helping guide Gris. She's just learning about how things work at the ASF. On 6/10/2019 4:48 PM, Naomi Slater wrote: > hey folks, > > two things that have happened in the past couple of days that concern me > > the first is that a board report was prepared and sent to the board by the > Chair without any input from the committee. (Gris acknowledged this a > separate follow-up email she sent to dev@diversity) > > SIDE NOTE: I am subscribed to board@ but I didn't receive the original copy > of the board report. so I am wondering which list it was sent to. perhaps I > have a misconfigured email client? > > ANOTHER SIDE NOTE: it is generally a good idea to copy dev@ when sending > the report to board@. that way, there is no need to send an additional > followup notification to dev@diversity > > my second concern is that I learned about a proposed D&I budget request > only because Jim copied in the private@diversity list on a thread that > seems to have been started on opperations@ (to which I am not subscribed) > > we had a brainstorming thread about our budget request last month, but to > the best of my knowledge, there has been no chance for the committee to > work on the actual proposal that was sent. I have seen no emails about it, > no draft text, no requests for review, etc > > as far PMCs are concerned, Chairs (who also serve as the VP of the > respective project) are not "project leaders". they function as an elected > representative of the committee to the board and are responsible for > foundation-level admin but they do not hold any special decision-making > power above-and-beyond a regular committee member > > cf. > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcouchdb.apache.org%2Fbylaws.html%23chair&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cbbfdae4c67c54a095bba08d6ede6c5e1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636957972750652411&sdata=hxrxTXbKwKlxyqGJpiEjchgu2bzCf4EAhK5umbkyZhA%3D&reserved=0 > > we are not a PMC, though. so I am not sure how things are meant to operate > with this committee. (this is one of the reasons I suggested that we draft > some bylaws that would clarify this sort of thing) > > I think that we should operate the way that a standard PMC does. that is, > decisions are made on-list, *by the committee*, and the Chair (i.e., VP > D&I) has the primary function of interfacing with the board > > apologies, Gris, if we're on the same page and these were both just > procedural oversights!! most new committees have teething troubles and > there's no reason we should be any different. but I figure this is an > important issue and one we should get clarity on as early as possible > -- Kevin A. McGrail Member, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fkmcgrail&data=02%7C01%7CRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7Cbbfdae4c67c54a095bba08d6ede6c5e1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636957972750662405&sdata=GADD7z8IFbinGoPm3dF8nI1nh%2BiHESB8Yr4d1mCcuzE%3D&reserved=0 - 703.798.0171
