Ben Sigelman

Per ^^^, I'd like to close this issue once #461 has resulted in our first successfully-executed annual survey (with opt-in D&I reporting).

In last week's GC meeting, we decided to integrate the survey component here with our 2020Q4 election process, just to minimize the amount of survey-nagging we have to do with...

So, with #488 in the past, we have 162 responses to our OpenTelemetry community annual survey. There were a few (optional) demographic questions at the top of the form, and...

> we'll begin strategizing the GA announcement process after the RC announcement is complete. IMO we would be well-served by some light planning for the GA announcement, which *should* be...

Re the original message here: this issue will not be closed by Sept 18 (today) since it's been coupled to the annual election process in order to minimize the number...

@SergeyKanzhelev I was just thinking that we somehow tie it to the ballot-submission process itself (method TBD)... it should only take a minute.

One idea – perhaps controversial – would be to require vendors _who have a seat on the governance committee_ to also staff diverse maintainers and approvers on the project (......

For anybody watching this issue, per the initial issue description, we are entering the following phase: >From June 18-July 2, we can debate [the ideas proposed above] So, consider this...

Related: https://github.com/open-telemetry/community/issues/402

Last week, the Governance Committee (GC) discussed the idea of requiring vendors with GC seats to also hit some minimum requirements around the diversity of their OTel maintainer+approver staffing. GC...