community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Gruno <>
Subject Re: on "meritocracy"
Date Tue, 02 Apr 2019 16:11:33 GMT
On 02/04/2019 10.57, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I don't think anyone expects it to die, but rather that D&I be one of
> the core aspects of community development and not an effort,
> in and of itself. If it reaches critical mass and warrants being
> spun out (due to clear division of tasks between D&I and ComDev)
> then I think everyone would support that.
> IMO, spinning out does not guarantee that an effort will succeed and
> not die (we have loads of history to show that), nor does keeping
> it, for the time being, in ComDev mean that it will wither or die on
> the vine.

The specific organizational structure does indeed seem like a moot 
topic. What matters is that wherever this take place, the group is given 
*space and freedom* to get some work done. I'd be fine with it being 
within ComDev, I'd also be fine (but perhaps a bit confused) with it 
being a thing of its own...but what it really just needs is a space to 
work within, and a sufficient amount of isolation from bike-shedding.

I'd recommend a separate mailing list (to provide focus) and a JIRA, 
perhaps some place to put documents (either within the comdev svn area, 
or somewhere else if spun off), and then...just get to work :)

> Just my 2c
>> On Apr 2, 2019, at 11:38 AM, Griselda Cuevas <> wrote:
>> I agree with Sam that if we do not formalize this as a committee it will
>> die.
>> I understand and acknowledge the reasons why this being part of ComDev
>> makes sense: simplicity and agility to get off the ground.
>> However, this rationale still treats the effort to embrace the need for a
>> Diversity and Inclusion strategy as a proof of concept, expecting it will
>> die. I have committed to make this happen and the commitment includes
>> driving this through the bureocracy needed to make the group and efforts
>> part of the ASF DNA.
>> If we do not do it now, it will just become what Naomi mentioned: yet
>> another try.
>> I am happy to walk the walk and structure work and needs to make this
>> happen.
>> I would suggest we still aim for the committee or at least define a clear
>> goal to hit for it to graduate to that level. Right now the
>> success.measurement is unclear and vague.
>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019, 8:12 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <>
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 4:57 PM Sam Ruby <> wrote:
>>>> ...My feeling is that it will die here...
>>> IIUC what's been proposed so far is a new mailing list and issue tracker.
>>> Both can very well be owned by comdev and that shouldn't limit
>>> progress in any way.
>>> It's just that the comdev PMC is responsible for oversight and
>>> reporting on those new initiatives, and it keeps things simple for
>>> now.
>>> -Bertrand
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message