I don't think we have consensus on this.
On 23 May 2013 19:25, Kelcey Jamison Damage <kel...@bbits.ca> wrote: > Ok, > > To summarize it looks like we all want to have 3rd party resources > available, we want to ensure the content of those resources reflects > properly on the project, and the wiki sounds like the best way to do it and > stay neutral. > > Does every one agree with this so far? > > Thanks > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Noah Slater" <nsla...@apache.org> > To: marketing@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 11:21:31 AM > Subject: Re: Packt Book - Publish on our website? > > If things are done on the wiki, it would be clear that this is a community > resource, and not an official project recommendation. We always have the > option of removing something that is obviously spammy, or low-quality, etc. > > > On 23 May 2013 18:48, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 23, 2013, at 1:38 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Book review is very costly. Several days, to weeks, depending how > > thorough > > > you are, and how much free time you have, etc. Do we really want to > > > introduce this sort of bottleneck? > > > > When I commented earlier I was not thinking of putting any hard barriers > > like committer status. > > > > I was merely thinking about books that can be written in couple days, > with > > very poor english, terrible formatting and that could be out of scope > > despite a "cloudstack" title. We don't want those books listed anywhere. > > > > A blanket approval for listing books is not a good idea, we need a > minimal > > sanity check. > > > > -sebastien > > > > > > > > > > > On 23 May 2013 16:27, Musayev, Ilya <imusa...@webmd.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Perhaps we can revisit the thought of making it commiter written VS > > >> comitters reviewed. > > >> > > >> As error safeguard measure it would make sense if have at least 3 > > >> commiters review the publication. > > >> > > >> Reason being, while many of us are comitters, some of us maybe more > > >> competent in some areas of ACS and less on the other. Therefore if we > > have > > >> several comitters review the publication, we minimize the error > > posibilty. > > >> if i was to make an example, i've spent alot of time building private > > >> clouds that would suit traditional enterprises, i may not be an expert > > on > > >> designing web hosting shops (just yet). > > >> > > >> Obviously exclusions apply, if someone have spent many years as a core > > ACS > > >> architect and developer - he may not need several commiters to review > > the > > >> publication - though it would not hurt. > > >> > > >> The commiters who will be reviewing publication must notify the > > community > > >> via mailing list. If there are points of uncertainty, the should be > > >> brought on ML as well. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -------- Original message -------- > > >> From: Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org> > > >> Date: > > >> To: marketing@cloudstack.apache.org > > >> Subject: Re: Packt Book - Publish on our website? > > >> > > >> > > >> On 23 May 2013 05:05, John Kinsella <j...@stratosec.co> wrote: > > >> > > >>> > > >>> On May 22, 2013, at 1:30 PM, Joe Brockmeier <j...@zonker.net> wrote: > > >>>> Books authored by committers might be a good metric. > > >>> > > >>> +1 > > >>> > > >> > > >> I think this is exclusionary. As Kelcey points out, there's a high > > >> probability that some of the best books on CloudStack are not written > by > > >> committers. > > >> > > >> > > >> On 23 May 2013 07:06, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >>> > > >>> Let me put it bluntly. IMHO wiki pages are a death sentence, nobody > > will > > >>> find that information. > > >>> If it's not featured on the website then there is no point talking > > about > > >>> it. > > >> > > >> > > >> Blunt, but hyperbolic. ;) If you really feel so strongly about the > wiki, > > >> you should propose that we shut it down. ;) > > >> > > >> The wiki is a community resource, and we should embrace that, and > > encourage > > >> that. > > >> > > >> If you're concerned that people visiting the main website will not > > notice, > > >> and will never find, a page that lists third-party resources, then I > > >> suggest a patch that provides a link in the nav saying "third-party > > >> resources" and link it to the wiki. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> NS > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > NS > > > > > > > -- > NS > -- NS
