[OpenID board] [OIDFSC] Closing inactive OpenID working groups

Johnny Bufu johnny.bufu at gmail.com
Wed Feb 23 19:51:13 UTC 2011


+1

Johnny

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 06:56:52AM +1300, David Recordon wrote:
> +1
> 
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Allen Tom <allentomdude at gmail.com> wrote:
> > [+openid-specs@ to reach a wider audience]
> > +1 for closing the 6 working groups listed in Mike's post.
> > While we're doing spec housecleaning, we should also try to finalize the
> > OpenID/OAuth Hybrid and OpenID UI Extensions. AFAIK, there has been no
> > changes to either of these specs for about a year, and vendors have already
> > launched?implementations.
> > Allen
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> At the latest OpenID board meeting, I took the action item to have the
> >> specifications close down inactive working groups.? This is to help
> >> eliminate confusion among the members about where work is occurring and
> >> focus people?s efforts on the active working groups.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Per section 4.4 of the OpenID process document, ?The Specifications
> >> Council may recommend closure of a WG at any time that the WG has not had
> >> Minimum Membership for six consecutive months at the time of closure, and
> >> such recommendation will promptly be submitted to a vote of the OIDF
> >> membership, in accordance with the voting procedures in ?3.?? ?Minimum
> >> Membership? is defined in section 1.6 as ?five contributors?.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It?s clear that all of these working groups meet this criteria in terms of
> >> lack of participation by 5 members within the last 6 months:
> >>
> >> ????????? v.Next Core
> >>
> >> ????????? v.Next Discovery
> >>
> >> ????????? v.Next Attributes
> >>
> >> ????????? v.Next Certification
> >>
> >> ????????? v.Next User Experience
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Also, given the consensus to merge the Connect work into the Artifact
> >> Binding work, I would argue that we should close the Connect working group
> >> at the same time, so that it?s clear that people wanting to contribute to it
> >> should join the Artifact Binding working group, where the work is actually
> >> proceeding.? Formally, there have been 7 contributors on the Connect working
> >> group list in the last 6 months:? Breno de Medeiros, Chris Messina, Chuck
> >> Mortimore, David Recordon, John Bradley, Joseph Smarr, and Nat Sakimura.
> >> The most recent contribution was 11/3/10.? So we could either wait a few
> >> months to close it, or if three of the above contributors agree that it
> >> should be closed, I believe we could proceed with the membership vote to
> >> close the working group at the same time.? (I?d rather not have two
> >> membership votes closing working groups.)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> So after a discussion period, unless people form consensus around a
> >> different course of action, I?m going to propose a specs council vote that
> >> we close all 6 of these working groups.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Thanks
> >> all,
> >>
> >> ??????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????? -- Mike
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> P.S.? The present membership of the specifications council is:
> >>
> >> ????????? Johnny Bufu
> >>
> >> ????????? Breno de Medeiros
> >>
> >> ????????? Dick Hardt
> >>
> >> ????????? Mike Jones
> >>
> >> ????????? David Recordon
> >>
> >> ????????? Nat Sakimura
> >>
> >> ????????? Allen Tom
> >>
> >>
> >


More information about the board mailing list