(Bcc'd to onap-release and onap-discuss)
Dear TSC, Based on the survey responses my recommendation is to leave things "as-is", but lift the restrictions on projects creating their own list if desired. The survey results (below) were split 29 in favor of "as-is" and 31 in favor of splitting each project out, however there were barely enough total responses to qualify for a 90% confidence rate with a 10% margin of error. Thoughts? -kenny From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Kenny Paul via Lists.Onap.Org Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 10:22 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Meetings, Lists and Community Self-management Hmm. ~1300 potential voters and only 9 votes on this. Vote here if you care. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/53WFQD9 Thanks! -kenny From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 5:42 PM If you've been around the ONAP project for a couple of years you probably know that we made a decision to have a large general discussion list with tags rather than going with independent lists. Y'all are also probably well aware of the fact that calendar management has been "a challenge" from the very beginning. These issues aren't unique to us. Within the LF today there was a rather long Slack thread on these topics. The prevailing wisdom is that one mailing list per project/subcommittee whereby each list has it's own dedicated groups.io calendar is the best way to give the respective community control of their own destiny. Upsides to such an arrangement: * The PTL or subcommittee Chair would be the default list owner and responsible for maintain the groups.io calendar for their list. Downsides: * Potential for creating cross-communication silos * Cross posts being rejected if someone isn't subscribed to both lists Must haves: * There would still need to be at least 2 other moderators for each list. * The way we use Zoom accounts bridge management would probably need to be adjusted at some point, but for now we should be able to get by with our current "Bridge Manager" model. We can have a discussion here but the link here will take you to a non-binding "interest" poll to gauge if this is desirable to the community or not. I'll leave it up for a few days and then based upon the results I'll put together a proposal. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/53WFQD9 Thanks! -kenny -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#5730): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/5730 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/44911787/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
