cloudstack-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Karen Vuong <>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13
Date Sun, 21 Apr 2013 01:48:11 GMT
Hi all,

David and Noah - thank you for the feedback and pointers. It is much appreciated and very

Mark - thanks for confirming that you have received the approval from ConCom.

I will do the following:

1)           Since the Apache CloudStack logo will be used on<>,
I will have the web team link the logo to Karen to loop in trademarks@
and CC<> detailing
how the logo and other trademarks are used throughout the conference. (Including website,
invitations, lanyards, t-shirts or any other swag, booths, etc.) and the steps we have taken
to make sure they are used responsibly.

2)           Add a footer on<>
 - 'Apache, CloudStack, Apache CloudStack, and the Cloud Monkey are trademarks or registered
trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation'

3)           Have the ASF listed as a community partner.

4)           Add a paragraph with a brief description of Apache CloudStack to<>
on the 'About page' and landing page. This will also include a link back to the Apache project's
home page (, linked from the "Apache CloudStack" wording.

About Apache CloudStack

Apache CloudStack is open source software designed to deploy and manage large networks of
virtual machines, as a highly available, highly scalable Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS)
cloud computing platform. CloudStack is used by a number of service providers to offer public
cloud services, and by many companies to provide an on-premises (private) cloud offering,
or as part of a hybrid cloud solution.

5)           Approval from ComCon was done in February 2013 (Mark has confirmed).

6)           PPMC approval - 8 PMC members participated and seemed to all be for the event
(David has confirmed).

If anything else comes to mind, please feel free to share. Thanks!

Best regards,


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Hinkle []
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2013 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Website - CloudStack Collaboration Conference NA '13

I got permission for the conference back in February from ConCom. Nick B.

asked that we meet the requirements to have reps from more than two organizations on the planning
committee. I thought we sent it to private but those archives aren't trasnparent so I cat
confirm we also discussed on the public list with no objections.

We have included Chip Childers, John Kinsella, David Nalley and Joe Brockmeier from the PMC
to fulfill the requirements of having members from multiple organizations on the planning

We met on Friday and agreed we'd make the site live and let the marketing list know that it
was live so we could get feedback and make sure all trademarks are applied properly. We agreed
to make sure any changes happened as soon as possible if there were errors.

I thought I jumped through every possible hoop here but if there's something I missed I'd
be glad to do something else.


On 4/20/13 6:40 PM, "David Nalley" <<>> wrote:

>On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Noah Slater <<>>

>> I've not been involved in many conferences related to Apache

>>products, so  my advice here is not representative of policy. Just

>>what seems like might  be a good idea based on what I know.


>> Ideally, the plans for this conference would have been run past the

>>CloudStack PMC, ConCom, and Brand before we went live with it.


>> need approval from these groups. But what's done is done.


>> However, it might be a good idea to run it past them now, as we do

>>need to  establish that approval retroactively.


>> Perhaps send a message to<>,

>><>, detailing
the ways in which you are

>>using  the Apache CloudStack trademarks, and the steps you have taken

>>to make sure  they are used responsibly.


>> Perhaps send a message to<>, CCing

>><>, detailing
the plans for the conference.


>> am not sure what specific information ConCom are looking for. But see

>>Ross  Gardler's recent thread on<>
for more



>> smaller events it looks like this sort of thing is not important, but

>>ConCom certainly need to be involved for any conference level events.)


>> There's an active thread about how PMC oversight works for trademarks

>>and  events and what have you, that I haven't followed up on yet.

>>(Sorry about

>> that.) But until we have something ratified, I am assuming that

>>approval  for things like this can be done via lazy consensus. i.e.

>>This thread, and  two separates threads as detailed above, copying the

>>PMC, should be enough.

>> (Assuming nobody raises objections within 72 hours.)


>> Chip, or anyone else from the PMC, feel free to correct me on any of




>My understanding based on this thread:



>is that concom was pinged back in February, but I can't verify as I am

>not on concom and can't peruse the archives. In the referenced thread,

>8 PMC members participated and seemed to all be for the event, so I

>don't think that PMC approval is an issue.



  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message