[OpenID board] Motion: allow use of OpenID trademark on Google Code (part 1 of 2)

Johannes Ernst jernst at netmesh.us
Mon Jun 1 04:32:42 UTC 2009


So what's wrong with the OIDF helping to assemble an open-source  
project that does all of what you say, and that has a name OTHER than  
OpenID?

The W3C doesn't call its browser "HTML" either. Imagine if it did.



On May 30, 2009, at 14:58, Chris Messina wrote:

> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Johannes Ernst <jernst at netmesh.us>  
> wrote:
> When the OIDF was started, we explicitly decided that the OIDF would  
> not maintain or endorse any particular code base.
>
> I agree that we should not endorse any codebase, but I disagree that  
> the foundation should not or can not provide resources,  
> infrastructure or act as a convening force to facilitate the  
> development of libraries.
>
> The OpenID libraries could be made much more usable, lightweight and  
> approachable if effort and resources were put into them. The reality  
> is that no one is going to do this "out of the goodness of their  
> hearts" (least of all, without community momentum providing a  
> different kind of incentive to participate).
>
> We finally have interest from folks to move the PHP library forward,  
> and rather than have this work happen off to the side, I would  
> really like to see this work happen in plain view, where others will  
> see that this work is happening and then become interested in  
> joining it.
>
> Ideally we will have a mix of board and regular members of the  
> foundation running the project, and maintaining resources related to  
> the libraries.
>
>
> While that decision can of course be overturned, I think the  
> rationale for it is as good today as it was back then -- we want  
> OpenID supporters to agree on the spec, and compete on  
> implementations. In my view, that is essential for encouraging the  
> growth of a healthy, innovative marketplace of both products and  
> ideas.
>
> I don't think that a spec alone is sufficient; you need high quality  
> implementations that are also interoperable, and to that end, the  
> foundation has an interest and responsibility to encourage the  
> collaboration of implementors to create interoperable and compatible  
> implementations.
>
> I also agree with using market mechanisms to increase competition,  
> but I do not believe that competition will occur until you've  
> created a baseline playing field in which to compete. I do think  
> that the popup/UI extension is one area were we're seeing alignment  
> and competition occur, but it is work that is happening to fill a  
> void that has been made manifest by all the different (and  
> confusing) implementations of OpenID in the wild.
>
> In other words, I believe that we need planes that are proven to fly  
> before we can expect people to build Harrier jump jets on their own.
>
> I think that we've made tremendous progress in the last six months  
> on proving the viability of OpenID in the marketplace, but I think  
> that we have to double-down and make it *much easier* to implement  
> and adopt OpenID, and to have it work well out of the box for folks  
> who have not been involved in this community or identity technology  
> from the beginning.
>
> And that requires clean libraries and implementations that take  
> little fore-knowledge for granted and lead the way towards deploying  
> a successful implementation.
>
> We don't have those resources assembled today.
>
>
> There is nothing wrong in my for the foundation to encourage a  
> vibrant OpenID open source project. Declaring it to be "the one and  
> only" would be a big mistake, however. The naming that's proposed  
> implies to me exactly that and that is worrying to me.
>
> I agree with this. And that's not what is implied or intended by  
> hosting the OpenID libraries on Google Code. In fact, I hope that we  
> can even provide pointers to (or checkouts of) competing  
> implementations in the same language in the repository, but document  
> their strengths and differences in an accessible way.
>
> At the same time, I think that the goal here is to bring together a  
> great deal of effort and might to push these libraries forward; I'm  
> approaching using a method that I've found successful in the past  
> and will continue to pursue it unless or until someone proposes an  
> alternative and is equally willing to seeing it through to completion.
>
> It isn't that my approach is the only one that will work, it's just  
> that it's the one that I've used successfully in the past and seems  
> appropriate in this context as well.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> On May 29, 2009, at 18:40, Chris Messina wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Martin Atkins <mart at degeneration.co.uk 
>> > wrote:
>>
>> It seems that github also satisfies all of the above requirements,  
>> with the advantage of making it easier to pull changes from the  
>> individual maintainer repositories due to github being designed  
>> with this in mind. Github also supports multiple repositories per  
>> account, so each library can have its own repository, maintainers,  
>> etc.
>>
>> Yes, but not everyone is familiar with GIT yet. SVN is much more  
>> widely known, I would think, in the general world of development at  
>> this time.
>>
>> I'm enamored by Github, but that doesn't mean that it's what  
>> everyone's using yet.
>>
>>
>> (I'm also a little confused as to what the advantage is of having  
>> "a central place to check out", given that the purpose of checking  
>> out is to contribute changes and changes will be contributed  
>> somewhere else. What is the purpose of checking out a working copy  
>> of repository other than the one you want to ultimately commit to?)
>>
>> My goal is raise the visibility of the libraries and the current  
>> home on OpenIDEnabled.com has failed to produce a community of  
>> active maintainers, from what I've seen.
>>
>> Perhaps it's just a matter of setting up a page at http://openid.net/code 
>>  that's a cleaned up version of http://wiki.openid.net/Libraries. I  
>> could certainly start there.
>>
>> The purpose of checking out the latest stable version of a library  
>> (or even latest unstable branch) is to enable folks to run the  
>> latest code in their projects and then update them easily when new  
>> versions are released. Perhaps tarballs are sufficient, but it  
>> seems like giving different communities like WordPress a simple  
>> place to do an SVN checkout from would be valuable.
>>
>> Feel free to tell me I'm wrong, or to support my proposal.
>>
>>
>> Both the PHP library and the Perl library I maintain are already on  
>> github. I'd be happy to have the libnet-openid-perl repository on  
>> my github account (apparentlymart) forked into the openid account  
>> on github as long as someone's going to commit to maintaining that  
>> fork.
>>
>> Unless someone steps up, it's unlikely to happen, I guess.
>>
>> But therein lies the rub: we have failed to develop a community of  
>> maintainers for the OpenID libraries and I think we're worse off  
>> for it. I'm attempting to get some momentum for such a community by  
>> centralizing at least a listing of the libraries in a familiar  
>> place that developers are used to seeing.
>>
>> GitHub doesn't provide a way to customize the homepage of a  
>> project, and so we need a place that is clean, approachable, well- 
>> designed and is easy for someone on the board (or some other  
>> dedicated community member(s)) to maintain.
>>
>> Again, I can start with creating a page on OpenID.net, but the  
>> symbolic achievement of having a central repository to me somehow  
>> seems important, and is what is motivating my desire to finally  
>> make this happen.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Chris Messina
>> Open Web Advocate
>>
>> Website: http://factoryjoe.com
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina
>> Facebook: http://facebook.com/chrismessina
>>
>> Diso Project: http://diso-project.org
>> OpenID Foundation: http://openid.net
>>
>> This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private
>> _______________________________________________
>> board mailing list
>> board at openid.net
>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>
> Johannes Ernst
> NetMesh Inc.
>
> <lid.gif> <openid.gif> http://netmesh.info/jernst
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Chris Messina
> Open Web Advocate
>
> Website: http://factoryjoe.com
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina
> Facebook: http://facebook.com/chrismessina
>
> Diso Project: http://diso-project.org
> OpenID Foundation: http://openid.net
>
> This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private
> _______________________________________________
> board mailing list
> board at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/board

Johannes Ernst
NetMesh Inc.

   http://netmesh.info/jernst



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20090531/4eb183a2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lid.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 977 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20090531/4eb183a2/attachment-0004.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: openid.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 903 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20090531/4eb183a2/attachment-0005.gif>


More information about the board mailing list