Thanks for the clarification, Naveen. I'd recommend against having wiki or other mutable document for such discussion, because people's response (or the lack of it in the case of lazy consensus) is only toward the version they saw, which can be changed. Rather, it would likely be a better idea to include all the key points in the discussion thread directly (like you just did), so that everyone at any point in time can see the same thing.
-sz On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 10:12 PM, Naveen Swamy <mnnav...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sheng, > It is in the wiki, I also added a TOC to find it easily. > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/ > PROPOSAL%3A+Apache+MXNet%28Incubating%29+Office+Hours# > PROPOSAL:ApacheMXNet(Incubating)OfficeHours-How > ? > How? > > Developers would have 1 hour every week to dedicate to office hours > meeting. Typical flow for process is like this: > > - > > at least 24 hours before office hours session user signs up for one of 2 > slots (each slot is 30 minutes) by filing jira issue. In that issue user > will provide questions/concerns and relevant details pertaining to > subject. > - > > before or on a day *preceding* office hours session the developer who > leads office-hours for that week reviews existing queue > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=Project%3D% > 22Apache%20MXNet%22%20and%20issuetype%3D%22Office%20hours%22%20%20and% > 20component%20in%20(Keras%2C%20Gluon%2C%20%22Scala%20API% > 22%2C%20%22Java%20API%22%2C%20ModelServer%2C%20ONNX)> > of filed issues and investigates 1 or 2 filed for upcoming session. The > goal is to prepare for session as much as possible in advance. > - > > Every week one of the Apache MXNet community members > (committer/developer) could drive this effort in each area that > is offered > is support with. > - > > if necessary they could to engage SME that has a lot of expertise in > area relevant to question/issue filed. > - > > at a scheduled time the developer leading office hours dials into > meeting bridge and verifies that corresponding user has joined the line. > - > > if by the end of time slot issue/question has not been fully > addressed, developer would propose to take further conversation to > the > public forum(dev@ list or JIRA). This way office hours slots won't > spill over and both slots could be accommodated for. > - > > if any of the questions have not been fully addressed during session, > developer will follow up and address outstanding scope of > issue/question. > Corresponding jira issue filed for session should be used as the outlet > for > following up. > - > > one possible follow up could end up being new feature request or bug > fix. If that is the case - developers would convert corresponding > office > hours issue into normal GitHub issue. > - > > We request SMEs to help in following up by the issues. > - At the end of the office hours conversation, developer who helped > the user would summarize their interaction on the JIRA filed. > > > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 10:04 PM, Sheng Zha <szha....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Naveen, > > > > While your enthusiasm is certainly appreciated, next time, shall we > include > > the "new Issue Type" in the discussion first? I found no prior mention on > > this. > > > > Also, a reminder to everyone that next time, let's respect Apache Infra's > > time by following the instructions to have an Apache mentor to create > issue > > after discussion, instead of "just create". Thanks. > > > > -sz > > > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 7:36 PM, Naveen Swamy <mnnav...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hey All, just created a INFRA ticket(https://issues.apache.o > > > rg/jira/browse/INFRA-16805) requesting a new Issue Type "Office Hours" > > on > > > JIRA to better manage and support Office hours request. > > > > > > One feedback I received was that "Apache" was neither mentioned in the > > > discussion nor in the PROPOSAL on the wiki. This is a valid feedback > and > > I > > > have fixed the PROPOSAL. > > > I propose the office hours under discussion should be explicitly called > > > "Apache MXNet Office hours". > > > > > > Also, Apache INFRA asked to create INFRA tickets only through mentors > > > > > > Can one of the mentors kindly help take this ticket forward. > > > > > > Thanks, Naveen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Pedro Larroy < > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Yes Naveen, I think you are saying exactly the same as I hinted. > Sheng > > > also > > > > agreed with this. > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:54 PM Naveen Swamy <mnnav...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I do not think there needs to be a distinction made for > > > > > support/office-hours by committer or contributors(in this case > Amazon > > > > > employed contributors) -- correct me if I misunderstood your guess > > :). > > > > > Like I said, I would rather call it MXNet Office hours and > categorize > > > the > > > > > kind of support that is offered, we might be able to find > > contributors > > > > > willing to do this in different parts of the world regardless of > > their > > > > day > > > > > job or not. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Sheng Zha <szha....@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I'm guessing Mu's intention is to make it clear that such > > invitation > > > is > > > > > > extended by teams in Amazon/AWS instead of by committers, so as > to > > > > avoid > > > > > > the confusion of the naming "MXNet SDK". Suggestions to achieve > the > > > > same > > > > > > goal are welcome. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > -sz > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Isabel Drost-Fromm < > > > isa...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 18/07/18 23:30, Mu Li wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> A minor suggestion: rename MXNet SDK to AWS MXNet SDK or > Amazon > > > > MXNet > > > > > > SDK. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What exactly is the Amazon MXNet SDK? What is the AWS MXNet > SDK? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your suggestion triggered my question because: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#products > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isabel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
