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

Johannes Ernst jernst at netmesh.us
Mon Jun 1 05:00:28 UTC 2009


We had this discussion before and it lead to the Apache incubator  
named Heraldry. Admittedly that one failed, but I don't think it was  
because of the name ;-)

I would have the same misgivings for any project with similar  
organizational and technical circumstances.


On May 31, 2009, at 21:46, Chris Messina wrote:

> Huh?
>
> What do you propose we call it then? Are you actually opposed to  
> calling the project Google Code "OpenID"? Do you think that http://code.google.com/p/oauth 
>  was the wrong name for the OAuth project?
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 9:32 PM, Johannes Ernst <jernst at netmesh.us>  
> wrote:
> 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.
>
> <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/fba0c4d0/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/fba0c4d0/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/fba0c4d0/attachment-0005.gif>


More information about the board mailing list