[OIDFSC] Closing inactive OpenID working groups

Joseph Smarr jsmarr at gmail.com
Tue Feb 22 19:00:32 UTC 2011


+1 (sorry I didn't have more time to lead my working group, and I agree that
working on Connect/AB will force the issues anyway).

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 9:56 AM, David Recordon <recordond at gmail.com> 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
> >>
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs/attachments/20110222/3de3a3a7/attachment.html>


More information about the specs mailing list