Mailing-List: contact apachecon-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: apachecon-discuss@apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4DD7CD14.3090709@apache.org>
Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 15:32:52 +0100
From: Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB;
 rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: apachecon-discuss@apache.org
Subject: Re: How public is public?
References: <4DD77302.2040802@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <4DD77302.2040802@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 21/05/2011 09:08, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> Quite a number of lengthy discussions were had at the Retreat about
> future directions for events and about reaching out to a wider ecology.
> AIUI a number of new more public mailing lists

...

> But I'm wary about dipping my toe into the concom waters without
> sounding out comfort levels first...
>
> Opinions?
> Advice?


I'm afraid I am unable to express any opinions or advice relating to the 
retreat discussions. I was unable to attend and at the time of writing 
no proposals have been made on any list I read, which includes concom@a.o

In general though I am, and always have been, keen on concom operating 
just like any other project - i.e. recognising merit (which ConCom 
already does well) and public unless it is necessary to be private. For 
this reason I'm pleased to see this list created, welcome you here and 
encourage you to work with us to ensure the events you wish to engage 
with are (wherever possible) supported.

Ross