Board report, October 2021

# Board report, October 2021 ApacheCon@Home 2021 was held September 21-23, and we are still in the post-event stage. Here's some numbers: There were 3555 total registrations for the event, with 61% turnout. (Hopin suggests that 51% is a typical show rate for free online events, so this is pretty good.) <private> Ticket type breakdown: 94% $0 3.2% $10 1.6% $20 1.3% $50 Total ticket sales $4,490 </private> The event was sponsored by: Strategic: Google Platinum: Aceville Pte. Limited [Tencent Cloud] Apple Huawei Instaclustr Gold: Aiven OY AWS Baidu Online Network Technology (Beijing) Co. Ltd. Cerner Dremio Fiter Gradle Red Hat Replicated Xiaoju Science Technology (Hong Kong) Limited [Didi Chuxing] Silver: Beijing SphereEx Software Technology Co., Ltd Crafter Software DataStax Imply Microsoft Securonix Bronze: Technical Arts <private> Sponsorship totals: Total $90,025.00 Total Awaiting Agreement $9,100.00 Total Paid $72,425.00 Total Pending Invoice $4,000.00 Total Pending Payment $4,500.00 </private> <private> The Hopin.com platform itself cost us $31,000 for the 2021-2022 contract. However, that amount includes both ApacheCon events, as well as several smaller community events. The approximate cost of the platform just for ApacheCon@Home 2021 is $17,000, based on the per-seat cost. </private> Peak attendance at any one time was 711, which was for our opening keynotes. 1,393 people, in total, attended one or more of our keynote presentations. There were approximately 195 breakout sessions, led by approximately 240 speakers. (Numbers are approximate due to last minute changes to the schedule.) Top countries by registered users United States 1,341 (37.72%) India 440 (12.37%) Germany 197 (5.54%) United Kingdom 133 (3.74%) Canada 109 (3.06%) Other 1,335 (37.57%) Based on the post-conference survey (70 responses. More detailed survey results will be published soon.) 54% of attendees are Developers, 20% Architect. 49% of attendees were attending their first Apachecon, with 39% saying that they've attended 2-5 events. 71% of attendees said that the had only attended ApacheCons online so far. 70% of attendees said that they expect to attend an ApacheCon in the future. 29% said that they'll consider attending, but only if it's online. 1% said that they'd only consider attending again if it's in-person. 72% of attendees are *not* Apache committers. 44% of attendees learned about the event from an Apache mailing list, 15% word of mouth, and 20% via social media. All video from the event will be on YouTube at youtube.com/TheApacheFoundation (As of this writing, about 3/4 of it is already there. We hope that by this board meeting, it will all be available.) Details about the event may be found at https://www.apachecon.com/acah2021/ We are in the process of finalizing the event, and will update the ApacheCon website to reflect the events being over, as soon as the other work is complete. Meanwhile, we will begin to turn our attention to the future. Two main issues need to be discussed: * What ApacheCon 2022 will look like. * Using the Hopin platform for smaller project/topic events in the coming months. We welcome the input of the entire Apache community on these important considerations. <private> In the days immediately leading up to the event, we were contacted by a representative of the Muellners Foundation, asking that we replace a talk in the Fineract/Fintech track with a talk that had not gone through the CFP process. We declined to do so, since we were well past all deadlines, and because this circumvents our talk selection process. They responded to this refusal with an extended tirade on the Fineract mailing lists. In particular, they personally attacked the Fineract track chair, Javier Borkenztain, and accused him of a conflict of interests. They also sent us a 30 page document (full disclosure: I have *not* read the whole document yet.) criticizing the talk selection process, and the project governance of Fineract. This document was also sent to a half-dozen other Apache mailing lists, including Board and Legal. In following up with them after the event, it remains unclear what, if anything, they are asking of us. However, they have made it clear that they do not intend to participate in future event planning, as they consider it a conflict of interests to participate in the event while also submitting content to the event. It remains unclear whether their veiled legal threats carry any actual weight. More context for this may be found on the Fineract mailing list. Useful starting places might be: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rb7caf2df1f88084c22e382dce3467b6e4a10da901b1059c84e319fb4%40%3Cprivate.fineract.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r8f24b839860b009ad50e954e6200d36b8e2014169527327e37c6aa4c%40%3Cdev.fineract.apache.org%3E https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r6964b07bfe222ff5cb23c7a3de2cb5a0587c627b485211b1c719b91e%40%3Cboard.apache.org%3E However, it is useful to note the conclusing of that third thread, in which Sander indicates that this is not a matter for the board. </private>