[OpenID board] 4 spec process improvement board votes - results are in

David Recordon david at sixapart.com
Fri Jan 30 17:39:05 UTC 2009


I take it that you're ignoring what I said and not even acknowledging  
it with a direct response?

As to emailing the members, we need to email legal contacts as well if  
the members provided them which I'm unsure how the membership tool  
currently captures.  We do however have legal contacts for many of the  
companies that signed contribution agreements for working groups which  
the ones I know of can be found in http://openid.net/ipr/Non-Assertion-Agreement/executed/ 
.

I'm also happy to help draft/edit this blog post given that it is  
valuable to tie into a larger narrative about how the IPR work we did  
has since influenced other communities in a major way.

--David

On Jan 30, 2009, at 7:58 AM, Brian Kissel wrote:

> Nat, please let me know when you have the wording completed so we  
> can post on the OIDF homepage and send out an email to all OIDF  
> members for the notification period before the vote.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brian
> ==============
> Brian Kissel
> Cell: 503.866.4424
> Fax: 503.296.5502
>
> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On  
> Behalf Of David Recordon
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 1:05 AM
> To: board at openid.net
> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] 4 spec process improvement board votes -  
> results are in
>
> I believe that Mike was objecting to starting the 21 day clock  
> without actual text changes in the document.  I would advise that  
> this work be delegated to the IPR Committee (if we even still have  
> one) and for them to come back to the board once there is actual  
> blessed text to review.
>
> I still believe that given a 21 day review period coupled with the  
> high degree of notifications and voting required to change the IPR  
> Policy and Process that taking an extra few days to round up any  
> other changes is truly the best path forward.  We know this Process  
> is broken as we've tried to use it a few times and we have groups  
> like "Step2" creating new work outside of the OpenID Foundation  
> because our Process is too complex and difficult to navigate.  Let's  
> fix that instead of trying to ignore the entire set of problems for  
> expediency especially when the Specs Council is now actually  
> starting to work again.
>
> --David
>
> On Jan 29, 2009, at 9:29 PM, Brian Kissel wrote:
>
>
> Sorry if I wasn’t clear, I only meant to start the 21 day clock for  
> the 4 spec process improvement motions that Nat made that have  
> already been approved by the board.  The exact wording for those  
> motions are the same as they word for the board votes.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brian
> ==============
> Brian Kissel
> Cell: 503.866.4424
> Fax: 503.296.5502
>
> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On  
> Behalf Of Mike Jones
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 9:02 PM
> To: board at openid.net
> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] 4 spec process improvement board votes -  
> results are in
>
> Yes, I am opposed.   The notification must include the precise  
> proposed text changes to the IPR documents, preferably as tracked  
> changes to the approved originals, so the lawyers know exactly what  
> changes are being considered to our IPR policy and process.  Until  
> those precise changes are drafted and available, we can not start  
> the 21-day legal review process.
>
>                                                                 --  
> Mike
>
> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On  
> Behalf Of Brian Kissel
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:15 PM
> To: board at openid.net
> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] 4 spec process improvement board votes -  
> results are in
>
> Given that we need a 21 day notification for a membership vote, I’d  
> suggest we start that official notification now.  Anyone opposed to  
> that?
>
> Nat, can you create the posting for the home page of the OIDF  
> website, which is also required?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brian
> ==============
> Brian Kissel
> Cell: 503.866.4424
> Fax: 503.296.5502
>
> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On  
> Behalf Of Nat Sakimura
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:58 PM
> To: david at sixapart.com; board at openid.net
> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] 4 spec process improvement board votes -  
> results are in
>
> Hmmm. While this option sounds attractive, we might want to take two  
> phased approach.
> I have just made motions for the urgent things. If we start  
> requirement gathering at this stage, it will delay these changes.
>
> So, my proposal is to do what the board vote approved in parallel to  
> the longer term ammendment with requirement gatherings. (BTW, there  
> are bunch of things that I want to list under this mid-term project.)
>
> I will draft the ammendment to the Process document this weekend.
>
> One of the motion is unrelated to the Process document, but to  
> assign the committee liaison the power to take an initiative to  
> facilitate and advance the specs process. i.e., David is now  
> officially empowered to chase down the specs council members as well  
> as to help out the proposers so that the process goes as quick as it  
> can.
>
> I have not seen much progress on OpenID+OAuth hybrid and CX specs  
> council process. I hope this will improve the situation.
>
> =nat
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 5:10 AM, David Recordon <david at sixapart.com>  
> wrote:
> Given that there are some other things we'd like to amend to the IPR  
> Process, should we try to capture the entire list of changes we wish  
> to make so we only need to do this once?
>
>
> On Jan 29, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Brian Kissel wrote:
>
> OK thanks Mike.  Do we have a "members" email address to start the  
> membership notification period?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brian
> ==============
> Brian Kissel
> Cell: 503.866.4424
> Fax: 503.296.5502
>
> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On  
> Behalf Of Mike Jones
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:55 AM
> To: board at openid.net
> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] 4 spec process improvement board votes -  
> results are in
>
> We can not amend the process doc without a membership vote, and the  
> following criteria being met, as per section 3.4 of the process:
>
> ·          21 day notice period
> ·          Multiple electronic notice required (if the OIDF member  
> has provided multiple addresses), including to a "legal contact," if  
> provided
> ·          Prominent posting (at least 21 days in advance of the  
> beginning of the voting period) on homepage of OIDF website
> ·          7 day voting period after end of notice period (if vote  
> is not taken at a properly-noticed meeting)
> ·          OIDF members may designate a proxy from the member's  
> registered OpenID identifier specifying the designated proxy's  
> OpenID identifier
> ·          Any approved change is prospective only
> ·          Approval of a change requires either of the following:
> Approval Option 1
> o    Quorum of greater of 60% of OIDF membership or 30 OIDF members  
> (no bypass option) and
> o    Supermajority vote of those constituting a quorum, plus a  
> majority concurrence by the OIDF Board
> Approval Option 2
> o    Quorum of greater of 30% of OIDF membership or 30 OIDF members  
> (no bypass option) and
> o    Majority vote of those constituting a quorum, plus a  
> supermajority concurrence by the entire OIDF Board (where "absents"  
> and "abstains" count as "no" votes)
> Any change to the IPR Policy or Processes will not be effective  
> until 21 days after approval, during which time then-current  
> Contributors may withdraw in accordance with the IPR Policy or  
> Processes as they existed prior to the change
>
> Nat could produce an updated draft of the doc (which should have  
> tracked changes on relative to the approved version) for legal  
> membership review prior to the vote, but none of this can go into  
> effect until the membership vote has occurred and met the criteria  
> above.
>
>                                                                 --  
> Mike
>
> From: board-bounces at openid.net [mailto:board-bounces at openid.net] On  
> Behalf Of Brian Kissel
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 4:29 PM
> To: board at openid.net
> Subject: Re: [OpenID board] 4 spec process improvement board votes -  
> results are in
>
> Thanks to everyone for your timely voting.  While the polls are  
> still open, all 4 of the motions made by Nat have passed.  Nat can  
> you take care of modifying the OpenID process document?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brian
> ==============
> Brian Kissel
> Cell: 503.866.4424
> Fax: 503.296.5502
>
> From: Brian Kissel
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 7:24 PM
> To: 'board at openid.net'
> Subject: RE: 4 spec process improvement board votes - please go to  
> the website and vote
>
> Hello All, just a reminder to go to the website and vote on these 4  
> motions.  To date we only have 5 votes and we need 7 for a majority  
> decision.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brian
> ==============
> Brian Kissel
> Cell: 503.866.4424
> Fax: 503.296.5502
>
> From: Brian Kissel
> Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 1:16 PM
> To: board at openid.net
> Subject: 4 spec process improvement board votes
>
> Hello OIDF board members,
>
> The four spec process improvement motions made by Nat Sakimura and  
> seconded by Brian Kissel have now completed the seven day  
> notification and discussion period.  Each motion is now available  
> for board voting on the OIDF polling tool.   A simple majority vote  
> by 7 or more board members is required for approval on each motion.   
> The vote ends on January 31st, 2009.
>
> Regards,
>
> Brian
> ___________
>
> Brian Kissel
> CEO, JanRain - OpenID-enable your websites, customers, partners, and  
> employees
> 5331 SW Macadam Ave., Suite 375, Portland, OR 97239
> Email: bkissel at janrain.com     Cell: 503.866.4424     Fax:  
> 503.296.5502
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus  
> signature database 3796 (20090124) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus  
> signature database 3805 (20090127) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus  
> signature database 3805 (20090127) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus  
> signature database 3811 (20090129) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
>
> -- 
> Nat Sakimura (=nat)
> http://www.sakimura.org/en/
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus  
> signature database 3811 (20090129) __________
>
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus  
> signature database 3811 (20090129) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus  
> signature database 3811 (20090129) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20090130/d22e5237/attachment-0002.htm>


More information about the board mailing list