[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