[cab-discuss] Attempt at Draft 02

[Karyn Ritter]

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Jul 11, 2006, at 4:27 PM, Karyn Ritter wrote:
> 
>> I think Stephen raises excellent points here. I have a few  questions 
>> that are not as substantive as Stephen's:
>>
>>   3.7: Do all decisions about suspension/expulsion or participants  have
>>   to go through the OGB? I know Section 3.5 says that voting  membership
>>   is not subject to involuntary termination (and have questions about
>>   this like Stephen Hahn does...), but can an OpenSolaris Group decide
>>   to suspend/expel a Contributor from their group?
> 
> 
> Not as currently written.  Expulsion from a Group's governance is
> accomplished by removal from the Core Contributors (which is mentioned
> briefly in VII, but should be described in article VI).  I did not
> consider that a Group might want to suspend a person from writing to
> just that Group's mail/forums, without having the OGB suspend that
> person from all Community mail/forums.  Does that need to be formalized?
> 
I don't know, I was just asking the question. :) At this point, it is 
probably best to leave it as is, and revise if the OGB is spending too 
much time on this kind of activity. I don't even know if this will come up.

Unless, of course, others see this as a more significant issue.

>>   In # 2 (still in 3.7), what does it mean to suspend "participant's
>>   write access to the OpenSolaris Community infrastructure"? Is that
>>   limited to writing to the repository? Forums/Mail lists? Group  pages?
> 
> 
> It is not limited. It should include anything to which participants can
> write, aside from the members meetings, but that set will change over  
> time.
> 
>>   5.3 (nit): In the second paragraph, I think it would be clearer to
>>   state that there is a term limit and that members who have hit the
>>   term limit can not be nominated again. The way it is written now was
>>   just unclear to me. But that may just be me.
> 
> 
> Do you have a specific change in mind?  It is written that way now so as
> not to bind terms to a specific length of time (e.g. 3 years).
> 
Re-reading it again, I guess it really is a nit... Just leave it as is.

Thanks,

Karyn

>>   6.4: Does this mean that all of the current "Groups" on
>>   opensolaris.org will be re-evaluated? There didn't seem to be any
>>   recognition of how existing Groups would be handled.
> 
> 
> Yes, I think they all need to be re-evaluated.  If nothing else, we need
> to have a documented scope for each group.
> 
>>   7.3 & 7.4: I'm not sure what references to "product release" mean. I
>>   know that I try to be very clear on opensolaris.org and any
>>   documentation that OpenSolaris is not a product. So, I'm not sure  what
>>   "Product release" means here. I assume it is a reference to whatever
>>   the Group is producing. Maybe I'm the only one with this concern
>>   because I've been close to Solaris for so long.
> 
> 
> OpenSolaris may not be a product, but it consists of many products.
> A "product" is what the lawyers would call a work product, and a
> "product release" is a decision by the Group that a given revision
> of their work product shall be given a name and published for use
> by others outside of that Group.  What exactly that means depends
> on the scope of the Group, which usually defines what the Group is
> expected to produce (if anything).  It could be anything from a piece
> of code to a conference event schedule.
> 
>> These comments/questions are also on the wiki discussion page.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> ....Roy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cab-discuss mailing list
> cab-discuss at opensolaris.org