On 7/8/19 3:08 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
I will be negative 1 and say that planners, also not a traditional pmc,
just had a complaint last month for this exact type of issue. Made by
Sally Khudairi.
FWIW, at the time I interpreted that more as a "would have been nice to
know" than a "YOU MUST".
Notifying folks that there's going to be a meeting is probably a good
thing. Making it an open invitation for all committee members is not,
since it decreases the signal-to-noise in the meeting, and often leaves
the outside party confused as to which voice was authoritative.
Internal-only meetings - sure, invite the whole family. External
meetings, where we are representing ourselves to a third party, need to
have a clear leader.
All IMHO, of course, but leaning heavily on a long history of Doing It
Wrong in ConCom.
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019, 14:05 Ross Gardler <[email protected]>
wrote:
+1
---
Sent from my phone, likely while waking down the stars and having a
conversation. Sorry about my carelessness, I blame the machines.
________________________________
From: Griselda Cuevas <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 8:00:46 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Need to Invite Committee Members to meetings was Re: Recap
from call w/ Outreachy's team
Thanks Myrle, and thank you Kevin for your intention to guide me.
Even when I might be relatively new to the ASF (been here for 2 years), I
want to clarify that this wasn't a "newbie mistake", I understand
transparency is key in the Apache Way. I intentionally didn't invite the
entire committee because this was a meeting I needed in order to make an
informed decision on how to move forward once we sorted other matters.
The Apache Way encourages transparency and I honored that by bringing back
to the list the result of a meeting I called, I didn't make a decision nor
hide the outcome.
I anticipate that I will continue to have more meetings where I won't be
able to invite the entire committee and I'd appreciate not to continue
being corrected for that. I'm saying this not because I'm too proud or
don't want to live by the Apache Way, I'm saying this because I want to get
the freedom to work on my own style and also set the stage for other in
this committee to do it.
One more point I'd like to make is that, there is no need for the entire
committee to be in every single discussion or project. There are so many
initiatives, and we are short in hands. I'd love for us to be a team where
we trust each other and we can delegate and lead.
I hope you understand where I am coming from.
G
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 10:34, Myrle Krantz <[email protected]> wrote:
A reminder Kevin,
While it is important to work to achieve buy-in from the many volunteers
Gris will need to help with the work, D&I is *not* a traditional PMC.
Think of it more like conferences. Precisely because such efforts have,
in
the past, been literally talked to death, the board chose a different
structure for this D&I project: Gris both needs, *and* *has* the right
to operate as VP Diversity, as she has done here.
What's more: she has already put in an *enormous* amount of effort to
achieve buy-in from the volunteers here. So even though she has the
right
to make executive decisions, she's clearly not making them without
consultation. Gris is doing what I, as a board member, intended her to
be
able to do when I voted for both the first and the second resolution on
D&I. I have full faith in both her ability to continue doing it, and in
Sam's ability to call Gris to accounts if she slips out of the bounds of
that role.
Best Regards,
Myrle
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:04 PM Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 7/8/2019 12:51 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
"If it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen" does not mean
nothing
can happen in this way, only that decisions are not made without time
for
community feedback and engagement.
No problem in this case. Thank you for keeping things moving.
Ross,
The committee not being notified it was happening and not extending the
invite to others on list is a no-no.
For similar complaints, see Sally's complaint on June 2nd for the
Hackathon meetings with too little notice for the bridge information on
planners@. Luckily Rich had emailed about it previously so this was
just the logistics details and more announcements were made since.
We need to give Gris and others new to Apache correct guidance. Using
synchronous comms especially meetings without everyone invited are
pitfalls for a lack of inclusion and definitely not in line with the
Apache Way.
Regards,
KAM
--
Rich Bowen - [email protected]
http://rcbowen.com/
@rbowen
