community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <>
Subject RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed
Date Wed, 04 Feb 2015 17:05:12 GMT
Sally the volunteer can do what she wants

Sally the contractor has no responsibility for ApacheCon

We are *not* responsible (by contract) for the content. We are responsible for *helping* with

Yes I believe LF should tell us what they want so they have a coherent strategy for the event
and can sell tickets.

I realize this is in conflict with what some people want (a community event) but we have other
vehicles for such events.

Sent from my Windows Phone
From: jan i<>
Sent: ‎2/‎4/‎2015 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On Wednesday, February 4, 2015, Rich Bowen <> wrote:

> On 02/04/2015 11:21 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>> Sally is not part of the ACNA process. Nobody in the ASF is. This is an
>> LF event.
>> We can (and should) make recommendations to LF but we are are not to take
>> on responsibility for these things. That takes us back to where we were
>> with ConCom.
> Thanks, Ross, for bringing this point front and center again. It's easy to
> get sucked into the strategizing conversation, and I need to keep my focus
> where it needs to be.

So let me see if I understand your statements correct, we the ASF are
responsible for content, including choosing which content.......and making
a company track is not to be considered content?

Or are you suggesting that LF tells which tracks they want and we limit
content to the actual presentations.

LF can surely help build such a track, but only if we tell we want that
kind of content.

jan i

> --Rich
> --
> Rich Bowen - - @rbowen
> - @apachecon

Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.

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