On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 3:15 PM Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Matteo, > > You will remember that I brought up the subcommittee idea in private > yesterday, and followed up today [before the email you sent and quoted > here] with an intention to start this public thread.
There have been several concerns expressed by the PMC about the proposal of sub-committees composed of vendor representatives. I don't think any of the concerns were addressed so far. To reiterate my opinion on this matter: 1. Contribution to the ASF is always as an individual, not as a company. 2. One person == One vote. It's not because a person is a representative of a company that his/her opinion should have more weight. 3. ASF is based on meritocracy. People are invited on as committers/PMC members based on their contributions to the project, not for belonging to a particular organization. 4. Creating sub-committees would essentially carve out the prerogatives of the PMC and the oversight that it's responsible to exercise. 5. Ultimately, the decision here belongs to the Pulsar PMC and it has to fit within the rules and spirit of the ASF. > Meanwhile, Aaron has not been hiding the groundwork he is laying for > meetups, including collaborating with your colleagues Tim Spann and Dianjin > Wang at StreamNative. What I contested was not the "hiding" part. The problem with this effort is that it was conducted completely outside of the PMC, while at the same time trying to portray it as an official effort of the PMC. To recap: * Everyone is allowed (and encouraged!) to create and promote events around Apache Pulsar (following the ASF guidelines on trademarks) * Using "Apache Pulsar Community" as the organizer is a mischaracterization, since that effort is not coming from the Pulsar PMC * These events should be renamed to something that makes it absolutely clear this is not from Pulsar PMC The eventuality of the PMC getting directly involved in organizing these events is something on which the Pulsar PMC would have to weigh in, although I don't see a lot of support for the idea so far. > But this is where it would be nice to have a Marketing /Communication > committee. We had them for the projects at my last position when I was at > a different foundation Aaron: the way organizations interact in other foundations (like CNCF, as one example) is very different from Apache. That's not to say one is "good" and the other is "bad", just that it is different and each approach has its pros and cons. Matteo -- Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org>
