OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

chairs message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [members] Re: [chairs] Re: [tab] Invitation to comment on revisions to OASIS policy documents


Bret,

I though we covered this issue when we worked on this within the Board.

" So I would propose that a TC can release the CSDs whenever they want and as frequently as they want."

How does a TC decide to "release" a CSD? It takes a vote. This can be a vote during a meeting or by electronic ballot - we even added that electronic ballots during meetings are allowed (e.g. across multiple sessions). The fact that a TC chooses to have two week electronic ballots (minimum is 7 days in TC process) is not a TC Process issue in my opinion. Personally, I think it is good practice to iterate a baseline (CSD) via TC votes on the whole document rather than wait until the end to decide its fate.

To address Vasileios comment:

"So I missed a step in the process. Two ballots. One for accepting a CSD and another to decide if it will be released for public review. Then I concur with Bret."

There is no requirement to serialise and can all be done in a single vote/ballot.

Martin.


On 18/09/2020 17:48, Bret Jordan wrote:
I agree. Long-term I would love to see us get to an automated workflow with git and document publication.

Thanks,
Bret
PGP Fingerprint:Â63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447 ÂF2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050
"Without cryptography vihv vivc ce xhrnrw, however, the only thing that can not be unscrambled is an egg."


On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 8:49 AM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
There is actually something I would like to add. If that takes place,
really whenever something is comitted in the TC SVN/git, it should be
possible to regard that as a draft deliverable for IPR purposes (e.g.
the limited patent covenant). A step of generating a number for a CSD
changes nothing IMHO.


On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 10:17:28AM -0400, Chet Ensign wrote:
> Bret, thanks again. I have started a comment log to collect all feedback and
> loaded your comment there so that the Board can discuss it.Â
>
> One quick note on the process:Â even if votes on CSDs are eliminated, TCs will
> still have to vote to approve releasing CSDs for public review. It will not be
> just the CS level.
>
> Again, thanks for the feedback.Â
>
> /chet
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 11:43 AM Bret Jordan <bret.jordan@broadcom.com> wrote:
>
>Â Â ÂChet,
>
>Â Â ÂGiven that the proposal removes the concept of a "working draft", we really
>Â Â Âshould remove the requirement to have a ballot on a CSD. Since the CSDs are
>Â Â Âreally just internal TC documents and not for external consumption, we
>Â Â Âshould get rid of this extra layer of un-neededÂbusywork process. Larger
>Â Â ÂTCs that are very active tend to suffer from Ballot fatigue from ballots
>Â Â Âthat are really not even necessary.Â
>
>Â Â ÂSo I would propose that a TC can release the CSDs whenever they want and as
>Â Â Âfrequently as they want. Then the ballot to approve it is done at the CS
>Â Â Âlevel. If you look at a TC that produces say 6 CSDs for a single CS and
>Â Â Âgiven that ballots need to be open really for 2 weeks, then for a standard
>Â Â Ârelease there is about 12 weeks or 3 months of dead time in a TC due to
>Â Â Âballots. This is just a waste.Â
>
>Â Â ÂThanks,
>Â Â ÂBret
>Â Â ÂPGP Fingerprint:Â63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447 ÂF2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050
>Â Â Â"Without cryptography vihv vivc ce xhrnrw, however, the only thing that can
>Â Â Ânot be unscrambled is an egg."
>Â Â
>
>Â Â ÂOn Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 3:57 PM Chet Ensign <chet.ensign@oasis-open.org>
>Â Â Âwrote:
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂDear OASIS members,
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂOver the past two and a half years, the OASIS Board has considered
>Â Â Â Â Âchanges to our project policy documents based on feedback from you, the
>Â Â Â Â Âmembers, the people who actively do the work.
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂAt its meeting on July 22, 2020, the Board approved a set consolidated
>Â Â Â Â Âchanges to the Committee Operations Process, the TC Process, the
>Â Â Â Â ÂDefined Terms, and the Naming Directives. Because these changes include
>Â Â Â Â Âsome significant changes to current practice, the Board would like to
>Â Â Â Â Âhear your comments.
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂThis email starts a 30-day member comment period. When the review is
>Â Â Â Â Âcompleted, our Board will review any comments and then propose a final
>Â Â Â Â Âset of approved documents as well as determining their effective date.
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂAs a member-centric and member-run organization, your opinions matter.
>Â Â Â Â ÂThe attached ZIP file contains redlined copies of each policy document.
>Â Â Â Â ÂA brief summary of the changes is included below. Please take some time
>Â Â Â Â Âto review the documents and share your thoughts with us. You can share
>Â Â Â Â Âyour comments by sending them to our archived discussion list at
>Â Â Â Â Âoasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org or, if you prefer, share them
>Â Â Â Â Âdirectly with me or with any OASIS board member or staff.
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂThank you in advance for your time & feedback!
>
>Â Â Â Â Â---
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂSummary of changes to Committee Operations Process, TC Process, Defined
>Â Â Â Â ÂTerms and Naming Directives.
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂThe major changes:
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We changed pronouns to be gender-neutral throughout.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We simplified the work product workflow. (A separate communication
>Â Â Â Â Âwill be forthcoming describing these changes.)
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂGoing forward, we have eliminated the confusing and duplicative
>Â Â Â Â ÂCommittee Specification Public Review Drafts and the Candidate OASIS
>Â Â Â Â ÂStandards. Your group will now produce Committee Specification Drafts.
>Â Â Â Â ÂPublic reviews will be done on the CSDs and, after you have approved
>Â Â Â Â ÂCommittee or Project Specifications, the CS or PS will be put forward
>Â Â Â Â Âfor the 60-day public review preceding the Call for Consent as OASIS
>Â Â Â Â ÂStandard. We hope this will address long-standing confusion over the
>Â Â Â Â Âconflicting numbering schemes as well as eliminate unnecessary
>Â Â Â Â Âduplication of publications.
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂA substantial number of the changes you'll see are simply eliminations
>Â Â Â Â Âof references to the eliminated artifacts.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We modified the rules on handling content post-approval to allow TC
>Â Â Â Â ÂAdministration to work with the editors to correct problems discovered
>Â Â Â Â Âduring publishing process. We agree that it is to everyone's advantage
>Â Â Â Â Âto put forward the highest quality work from our projects. We hope you
>Â Â Â Â Âwill take advantage of this to fix those niggling glitches that we come
>Â Â Â Â Âacross during preparation of your work.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We added a new section 1.10 to the TC Process titled "TC Vitality."
>Â Â Â Â ÂTCs will now be asked to review and confirm (or modify) their charter
>Â Â Â Â Âonce every four years.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We added a requirement to Committee Process section 1.4 Chairs that
>Â Â Â Â Âevery two years, a committee must reappoint its chairs. Sitting chairs
>Â Â Â Â Âare allowed to stand but must be reconfirmed by committee vote.
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂThe minor changes:
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We clarified the requirement that meeting minutes must be posted to
>Â Â Â Â Âthe TC's general email list. We hope this will help eliminate the
>Â Â Â Â Âhiccups when TC Admin has to postpone working on a support request
>Â Â Â Â Âuntil the minutes are sent to the mail list.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We removed a discrepancy between the definitions of Material and
>Â Â Â Â ÂNon-Material changes.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We clarified an ambiguity about how a Member gains voting rights
>Â Â Â Â Âduring a 60 day period if less than 2 meetings are held.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We shortened and simplified the Leave of Absence policy. Now, a first
>Â Â Â Â ÂLoA request is considered automatically approved.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We clarified that changing employers does not change a member's
>Â Â Â Â Âvoting rights or other status within a committee.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We clarified that a TC can use the electronic ballot tool to record
>Â Â Â Â Âvotes during a TC meeting.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â* We changed references from normative / non-normative to normative and
>Â Â Â Â Âinformative to be more in line with other SDO practice.
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂAgain, thank you for your time & feedback.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â--
>
>Â Â Â Â Â/chetÂ
>Â Â Â Â Â----------------
>Â Â Â Â ÂChet Ensign
>Â Â Â Â ÂChief Technical Community Steward
>Â Â Â Â ÂOASIS: Advancing open source & open standards for the information
>Â Â Â Â Âsociety
>Â Â Â Â Âhttp://www.oasis-open.org
>
>Â Â Â Â ÂMobile: +1 201-341-1393Â
>
>Â Â Â Â Â---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Â Â Â Â ÂTo unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>Â Â Â Â Âgenerates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
>Â Â Â Â Âhttps://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
> --
>
> /chetÂ
> ----------------
> Chet Ensign
> Chief Technical Community Steward
> OASIS: Advancing open source & open standards for the information society
> http://www.oasis-open.org
>
> Mobile: +1 201-341-1393Â



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]