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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

openc2 message

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


Subject: Re: [openc2] Subcommittee Reorganization - for/against/neither


I would say keep separation of concerns but merge the meetings. So the LS-SC and the IC-SC should meet together and have a common agenda (for an indefinite period).ÂÂ

RightÂnow the L-SC and IC-SC each meet once per month. I'm not sure I see any meaningful benefit to combining the meetings while retaining separate leadership, etc.

Duncan stated that in another branch of this discussion that "SC meetings should be to review text and/or resolve differences on issues (ie decide between alternative versions of text and or create new hybrid text). Text should be developed by proponents offline'". At the moment, at least in the IC-SC, we're lacking in both of those areas: we aren't getting contributions of text to review and discuss and we aren't getting a critical mass of viewpoints at SC meetings to have useful discussion.

I don't know the solution for increasing participation, but perhaps a very clear updated enumeration by each SC of work items (in-progress, planned, completed (?)) would be a useful first step. I haven't fully made up my mind on the reorganization proposal, but I do feel that Duncan and Michelle have presented some good points in stating their opposition.

Dave

David Lemire, CISSP
Systems Engineer

HII Mission Driven Innovative Solutions (HII-MDIS) â formerly G2, Inc.

Technical Solutions Division

302 Sentinel Drive | Annapolis Junction, MD 20701

Email: dave.lemire@g2-inc.com

Work: 301-575-5190 | Mobile: 240-938-9350



On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:52 AM Vasileios Mavroeidis <vasileim@ifi.uio.no> wrote:
I would keep the organizational structure the way it is. I donât think that re-organization will foster higher participation right now, but I do understand that having one group will allow more people to stay in the loop by aggregating them all together at this point . I would say keep separation of concerns but merge the meetings. So the LS-SC and the IC-SC should meet together and have a common agenda (for an indefinite period).


-Vasileios

On 24 Feb 2020, at 13:25, Brule, Joseph M <jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil> wrote:

Willing to go along with it either way.Â
Â
From:Âduncan sfractal.com <duncan@sfractal.com>Â
Sent:ÂSunday, February 23, 2020 8:29 AM
To:ÂBrule, Joseph M <jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil>; OASIS OpenC2 List <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject:Â[Non-DoD Source] Subcommittee Reorganization - for/against/neither
Â
It would be very helpful to understand what more people think about the reorganization. Please respond with where you are on the issue. Are you strongly for it, for it, strongly against it, against it, willing to go along with the majority either way, donât really care, other thoughts?
Â
My concern is my standards experience tells me that most people will keep quiet on issues like this and vote yes because they trust the leadership. In this case the leadership is divided. Being honest, I happen to be against the reorganization for the reasons Iâve stated in all my other emails, slack message, etc. So the âvote yesâ because everyone votes yes hurts my case and therefore Iâm trying to distinguish between the ânot raising objectionâ and the âactually forâ.
Â
It would be very useful to get more input â even if you say âI really donât careâ.
Â
Duncan Sparrell
sFractal Consulting LLC
iPhone, iTypo, iApologize
I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more atÂhttp://vsre.info/
Â
Â
From:ÂTC OpenC2 <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Joseph Brule <jmbrule@radium.ncsc.mil>
Date:ÂFriday, February 21, 2020 at 1:09 PM
To:ÂTC OpenC2 <openc2@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject:Â[openc2] Subcommittee ReorganizationÂ
Â
All,Â
Â
A reorganization of the subcommittees was proposed during the January 2020 TC meeting. The purpose of this email is to present the resolution, provide background information and initiate deliberations on the topic. Once the deliberations are complete, Dave Lemire will generate an electronic ballot in accordance with the direction provided by the TC during the February TC meeting.Â
Â
NOTE: Review the deliberations and if you believe that I did not capture the point correctly in the summary of the deliberations then provide the correction and/or provide additional points. If there is an error, then accept that it was an honest mistake on my part.ÂÂ
Â
FURTHER NOTE:Â SLACK messages are not available to all our members. I will attempt to transfer any SLACK messages to the oasis email relay, but it is preferred if you use this email as the medium for deliberations.Â
Â
RESOLVED: The OpenC2 Technical Committee shall form a new subcommittee to be known as the âLanguage and Architecture Subcommitteeâ. Upon formation of the new subcommittee, the âLanguage Subcommitteeâ and the âImplementation Considerations Subcommitteeâ shall transfer their activities to the new subcommittee.ÂÂ
Â
ÂÂ Background

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂA proposal to transfer the activities of the LSC and ICSC to a new SC was proposed during the January Monthly TC

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂThe general consensus was to revisit the issue after the Plug Fest and email deliberations

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂObjections were raised during the February Monthly TC meeting.Â

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂThere was general consensus with the approach of continuing the deliberations via email and upon conclusion of the email deliberations a decision will be made via electronic ballot.Â

ÂÂ After the Plug Fest, the proposed new subcommittee was brought up via email.

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂThe net effect is to combine the LSC and ICSC into a single subcommittee

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂThe AP SC will maintain its current tempo and leadership

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂObjections to the proposal were made known via email on Feb 18, 2020.

ÂÂ Summary of Deliberations

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂStatement FOR

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂLevel of effort required to revise and maintain is substantially less than the initial draft

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂThe scope of the LSC and IC-SC are at a 'systems' or âarchitecturalâ level while the scope of the AP-SC is at a 'component' level therefore logical to combine the 'system' or 'architectural' tasks in one subcommittee and the 'component' tasks in a separate subcommittee

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂThe results of the Plug Fest seem to validate the proposal in that the vast majority of the issues identified were component level

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂStatement AGAINST

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂShould retain separate subcommittees to retain their focus and maintain separation of concerns

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂSeveral (structured) subcommittees permit attendees to focus their attention on their areas of interest and expertise and avoid diluting the meeting.

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂRebuttal to the statement AGAINST

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂNo rebuttal offered

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂRebuttal to the statement FOR

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂThe reduced workload is more appropriately addressed by changing the cadence of the meeting rather than broaden the scope of the subcommittee.Â

ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂDo not agree that the current Language and IC-SC are more similar to each other, in fact [one individual] thinks that the AP-SC has more in common with the LSC than the IC-SC.ÂÂ

Â
Â
Joe Brule
Engineering (Y2D122)
FNX-3, B4A335
410.854.4045
'Adnius ad retinedam puritem noster peciosus corporalis fluidorumâ'
I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more atÂhttp://vsre.info/



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