Consolidated Delegate Proposal

Johannes Ernst jernst+openid.net at netmesh.us
Tue Oct 17 21:10:33 UTC 2006


>> I think we need to come up with a decision making strategy that we  
>> can live
>> with, and get the decision made.

What about first, declaring a requirements freeze. I think one of the  
reasons that discussions go around in circles is because new  
requirements and use cases are being thrown at the specs, and  
naturally, the specs do not meet new requirements without further  
change.

I've been burning to add some of my own to the mix, but thought that  
in the interest of getting OpenID 2.0 authentication out the door, I  
decided to better not. (after all, there is always a 2.1...)

What about if 2 significant "factions" disagree whether a given  
requirement is in scope or out of scope, it is out of scope for 2.0  
-- that way, agreement may be easier to reach than the other way  
round; it's also a faster process. And such a "delayed" requirement  
will be first thing on the roadmap post 2.0.

Just my 0.02 ...



Johannes Ernst
NetMesh Inc.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lid.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 973 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs/attachments/20061017/2d24b801/attachment-0002.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
  http://netmesh.info/jernst






More information about the specs mailing list