www-apachecon-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Presentation selections for ACEU 2015 Budapest.
Date Mon, 20 Apr 2015 21:22:00 GMT
Rich,

Asking me something?
Apparently you were more involved in a thought bending exercise/excursion
than phrasing a question. Remember, I am of the other kind (also and
including the nitpicking sort). Didn't see the question mark, nor the
invite...

As for the 'your OFBiz track': not mine. Ours.. Of and by the OFBiz
community, of and by The ASF. Us. We did it together. Of that I was a part.

That your/our selected producer has decided that it can't go on the way it
has been done before, I understand and accept. If I were them I would have
it done the same way.

As for 'coming from the inside track'. The ASF, the ApacheCon team, the
MarCom Office is also an inside track.

Best regards,


Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:27 PM, Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 04/20/2015 04:01 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>
>> Good luck with the 'we' aspect. And due to recent statements I don't have
>> the feeling that I am part of that.
>>
>
> I don't know what that this is in reference to. Can you elaborate?
>
> If you're referring to my "who is we" question on the other thread, that
> was just my way of asking of you were volunteering. I'm sorry if that made
> you feel like you weren't part.
>
> Nick stated very clearly what our experience has been in the regard of
> contacting communities - it works better when it comes from "inside" than
> when it's an unknown outsider.
>
> As to whether you are part of it, we ran your OFBiz track the last two
> events, and greatly appreciate your participation in that.
>
> The point of this thread is that presentation selection, the way that we
> have done it so far, has resulted in a track width that isn't drawing
> attendees (See Leif's email for a larger discussion of that), and our
> producer has decided to move to a strategy that will grow attendees, while,
> over time, being able to financially subsidize the kind of community event
> that we want to do in conjunction.
>
> Our voice, as the ASF, is always welcome, but in the end it's their
> decision because it's their financial risk.
>
> In the past we tried to give all of the financial risk to producers while
> retaining all of the control to ourselves. That turned out not to be a
> sustainable model, several times. We have finally learned this lesson, and
> don't want to risk unlearning it.
>
> We are aware, and discussed in our meetings with LF, that this might
> result in some members of the community feeling cut out of the loop. For
> that, I certainly take responsibility, while reiterating that I think it's
> the right decision for the long-term health of this event.
>
> --Rich
>
>
>  On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 04/20/2015 03:40 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>
>>>  Leif,
>>>>
>>>>   From what I understood from the statements by Ross, Jan, et all in
>>>> another
>>>> thread today (subject: Proposing Tracks for ACEU15, incomplete archive:
>>>> http://apachecon.markmail.org/message/7ezkr5dubt6ota4c) is that we
>>>> don't
>>>> have to propose/discuss scope, focus and depth of the Apachecon in
>>>> general
>>>> and of tracks in particular anymore. That is now done by the LF.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> We are in an advisory role, since we are the content experts.
>>>
>>> So it's certainly not the case that our voice is silenced. That would be
>>> silly on the part of the LF, since we are both client and customer, in
>>> some
>>> sense, for the event. So, we advise, but it's their decision, because
>>> it's
>>> their financial risk.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>

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