11:54 p.m.
Jim drafted this for us, I have made a few edits.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KeJgV8v8FT23Aln0gRsF7qOW1H6iOMWjHuMOh...
Comments please.
I suggest we place to first section on the "Adding a Project" page
and the the second section to the "Project Maturity" page
regards
Carl.
1:36 a.m.
If there are no comments by Thursday (tomorrow) I'll post it.
regards
Carl.
On 10/05/2011 09:54 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
Jim drafted this for us, I have made a few edits.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KeJgV8v8FT23Aln0gRsF7qOW1H6iOMWjHuMOh...
Comments please.
I suggest we place to first section on the "Adding a Project" page
and the the second section to the "Project Maturity" page
regards
Carl.
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
Board(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
2:10 a.m.
A “healthy” project, as determined by the oVirt Board exists
- Move details at http://www.ovirt.org/governance/project-maturity/
^ Should be "More"
Unfortunately this link does not seem to point to more information about how the
board makes this determination. Since you discuss it later, you can probably
drop the link. It has already been linked to previously anyway.
"There are many ways to measure this, but oVirt takes it lead from the ASF.
^ its
Otherwise, looks good to me.
On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 09:54:29AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
Jim drafted this for us, I have made a few edits.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KeJgV8v8FT23Aln0gRsF7qOW1H6iOMWjHuMOh...
Comments please.
I suggest we place to first section on the "Adding a Project" page
and the the second section to the "Project Maturity" page
regards
Carl.
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
Board(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
--
Adam Litke <agl(a)us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center
2:13 a.m.
thx.
On 10/05/2011 12:10 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
A “healthy” project, as determined by the oVirt Board exists
- Move details at http://www.ovirt.org/governance/project-maturity/
^ Should be "More"
Unfortunately this link does not seem to point to more information about how the
board makes this determination. Since you discuss it later, you can probably
drop the link. It has already been linked to previously anyway.
"There are many ways to measure this, but oVirt takes it lead from the ASF.
^ its
Otherwise, looks good to me.
On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 09:54:29AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>
> Jim drafted this for us, I have made a few edits.
>
>
>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KeJgV8v8FT23Aln0gRsF7qOW1H6iOMWjHuMOh...
>
> Comments please.
>
> I suggest we place to first section on the "Adding a Project" page
> and the the second section to the "Project Maturity" page
>
> regards
> Carl.
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
10:39 p.m.
On 10/05/2011 05:36 PM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
If there are no comments by Thursday (tomorrow) I'll post it.
please allow till monday.
thanks
regards
Carl.
On 10/05/2011 09:54 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>
> Jim drafted this for us, I have made a few edits.
>
>
>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KeJgV8v8FT23Aln0gRsF7qOW1H6iOMWjHuMOh...
>
> Comments please.
>
> I suggest we place to first section on the "Adding a Project" page
> and the the second section to the "Project Maturity" page
>
> regards
> Carl.
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
Board(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
7:15 a.m.
1. I think the opening paragraph is redundant:
"The oVirt Board has realized that for oVirt to be truly successful, the quality and
health of its associated projects must be extremely high. However, oVirt itself is just
starting out and also realizes the need to have a low “barrier to entry” for new projects
as well as a streamlined approach to accepting in new projects."
2. " The new project agrees ..
.. to integrate with one of the oVirt published API’s
.. to support the platforms release schedule."
Agreeing should be the requirement in order to enter the *incubation* phase.
Actually implementing the above should be required in order to graduate from the incubator
(necessary but not sufficient)
3. More detials at http://www.ovirt.org/governance/adding-a-subproject/
s/detials/details/
4. "All IP associated with the project codebase and support files (eg: website
content, logos, documentation, etc) is in good standing, tracked and provides a clear
license from copyright holder to oVirt."
First, shouldn't we have a disclaimer about patent infringements in the new project?
Also, should we require specific open source licenses? or maybe require that the licenses
are compatible with oVirt licenses?
5. "The Incubated project can, at any time, petition for a vote of the Board to
graduate to full status. The vote of the Board must be unanimous. Any NO votes must
clearly indicate why the Director did not approve graduation and must provide clear
guidance on what he/she is looking for to address the deficiency."
How often would the board "convene"?
----- Original Message -----
On 10/05/2011 05:36 PM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>
>
> If there are no comments by Thursday (tomorrow) I'll post it.
please allow till monday.
thanks
>
> regards
> Carl.
>
>
> On 10/05/2011 09:54 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>>
>> Jim drafted this for us, I have made a few edits.
>>
>>
>>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KeJgV8v8FT23Aln0gRsF7qOW1H6iOMWjHuMOh...
>>
>> Comments please.
>>
>> I suggest we place to first section on the "Adding a Project" page
>> and the the second section to the "Project Maturity" page
>>
>> regards
>> Carl.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board(a)ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
Board(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
4:22 a.m.
On 10/08/2011 05:15 PM, Ayal Baron wrote:
1. I think the opening paragraph is redundant:
"The oVirt Board has realized that for oVirt to be truly successful, the quality and
health of its associated projects must be extremely high. However, oVirt itself is just
starting out and also realizes the need to have a low “barrier to entry” for new projects
as well as a streamlined approach to accepting in new projects."
2. " The new project agrees ..
.. to integrate with one of the oVirt published API’s
.. to support the platforms release schedule."
Agreeing should be the requirement in order to enter the *incubation* phase.
Actually implementing the above should be required in order to graduate from the
incubator (necessary but not sufficient)
correct.
3. More detials at
http://www.ovirt.org/governance/adding-a-subproject/
s/detials/details/
4. "All IP associated with the project codebase and support files (eg: website
content, logos, documentation, etc) is in good standing, tracked and provides a clear
license from copyright holder to oVirt."
First, shouldn't we have a disclaimer about patent infringements in the new project?
Also, should we require specific open source licenses? or maybe require that the licenses
are compatible with oVirt licenses?
no, this is not required, the ASL2 covers that sufficiently. But
applying the ASL, all these items are being agreed to.
5. "The Incubated project can, at any time, petition for a vote
of the Board to graduate to full status. The vote of the Board must be unanimous. Any NO
votes must clearly indicate why the Director did not approve graduation and must provide
clear guidance on what he/she is looking for to address the deficiency."
How often would the board "convene"?
The board does not need to convene for this, votes can be started
24/7/365 days a year. As long as they are left open long enough for
people to comment. typically 72 hours. see the page on voting.
regards
Carl.
7:33 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
On 10/08/2011 05:15 PM, Ayal Baron wrote:
> 1. I think the opening paragraph is redundant:
> "The oVirt Board has realized that for oVirt to be truly
> successful, the quality and health of its associated projects must
> be extremely high. However, oVirt itself is just starting out and
> also realizes the need to have a low “barrier to entry” for new
> projects as well as a streamlined approach to accepting in new
> projects."
>
> 2. " The new project agrees ..
> .. to integrate with one of the oVirt published API’s
> .. to support the platforms release schedule."
>
> Agreeing should be the requirement in order to enter the
> *incubation* phase.
> Actually implementing the above should be required in order to
> graduate from the incubator (necessary but not sufficient)
correct.
> 3. More detials at
> http://www.ovirt.org/governance/adding-a-subproject/
>
> s/detials/details/
>
> 4. "All IP associated with the project codebase and support files
> (eg: website content, logos, documentation, etc) is in good
> standing, tracked and provides a clear license from copyright
> holder to oVirt."
>
> First, shouldn't we have a disclaimer about patent infringements in
> the new project?
> Also, should we require specific open source licenses? or maybe
> require that the licenses are compatible with oVirt licenses?
no, this is not required, the ASL2 covers that sufficiently. But
applying the ASL, all these items are being agreed to.
> 5. "The Incubated project can, at any time, petition for a vote of
> the Board to graduate to full status. The vote of the Board must
> be unanimous. Any NO votes must clearly indicate why the Director
> did not approve graduation and must provide clear guidance on what
> he/she is looking for to address the deficiency."
>
> How often would the board "convene"?
The board does not need to convene for this, votes can be started
24/7/365 days a year. As long as they are left open long enough for
people to comment. typically 72 hours. see the page on voting.
That doesn't sound right to me. In the least, there should be a minimal number of
board members required to vote (i.e. 3 acks with 10 people absent because they're on
national holiday is not good).
regards
Carl.
1:30 a.m.
On 10/11/2011 05:33 PM, Ayal Baron wrote:
> The board does not need to convene for this, votes can be
started
> > 24/7/365 days a year. As long as they are left open long enough for
> > people to comment. typically 72 hours. see the page on voting.
That doesn't sound right to me. In the least, there should be a minimal number of
board members required to vote (i.e. 3 acks with 10 people absent because they're on
national holiday is not good).
That is why there is the 72 hour rule, or 3 working days so people can
see the votes. It is also considered bad form to run votes over common
vacations or to extend the vote timeline to account for that.
Carl.
1:46 a.m.
The website has been updated.
I will restart proceedings on the project submissions shortly
Carl.
On 10/05/2011 09:54 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
Jim drafted this for us, I have made a few edits.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KeJgV8v8FT23Aln0gRsF7qOW1H6iOMWjHuMOh...
Comments please.
I suggest we place to first section on the "Adding a Project" page
and the the second section to the "Project Maturity" page
regards
Carl.
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
Board(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
4574
days inactive
4587
days old
9 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Adam Litke -
Ayal Baron -
Carl Trieloff -
Itamar Heim