[OIDFSC] Updating the OpenID specs council
Breno de Medeiros
breno at google.com
Thu Apr 3 00:57:17 UTC 2014
+1 for editor nominations
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>wrote:
> All eligible candidates other than Paul Madsen have indicated that they
> are willing to serve.
>
>
>
> I would propose that, as editors, we add Tim, Chuck, and Ashish to replace
> Dave, Johnny, and Allen and that we ask the board to add John to replace
> Dick. That would leave Naveen and Brian as eligible replacements if for
> some reason we need another member in the future. Do people agree with
> this plan?
>
>
>
> -- Mike
>
>
>
> P.S. Naveen, I still highly encourage you to involve yourself in the
> Native Applications work, as you have a lot of relevant experience there.
> You don't have to be on the specs council to be active in a working group.
> J
>
>
>
> *From:* Chuck Mortimore [mailto:cmortimore at salesforce.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, March 24, 2014 12:48 PM
> *To:* Mike Jones
> *Cc:* Ashish Jain; Naveen Agarwal; Brian Campbell; Paul Madsen; John
> Bradley; Marius Scurtescu; Paul Tarjan; andy.zmolek at enterproid.com;
> specs-council at openid.net; Don Thibeau
>
> *Subject:* Re: Updating the OpenID specs council
>
>
>
> Happy to serve as well. ( sorry about the delay....snowboarding :) )
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
> Chuck, Ashish, Naveen, Brian, and Paul - besides Tim and John, we still
> need two new members who are willing to serve. Which of you would be
> willing?
>
>
>
> Chuck and Ashish - I think it would be particularly good if you would
> serve, as there's already a Google representative and if John is selected,
> there's already a Ping representative. Serving takes very little time.
> What do you say?
>
>
>
> -- Mike
>
>
>
> *From:* John Bradley [mailto:ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, March 14, 2014 2:29 PM
> *To:* Mike Jones
> *Cc:* Chuck Mortimore; Naveen Agarwal; Marius Scurtescu; Paul Tarjan;
> Brian Campbell; Paul Madsen; Ashish Jain; andy.zmolek at enterproid.com;
> specs-council at openid.net; Don Thibeau
> *Subject:* Re: Updating the OpenID specs council
>
>
>
> I will accept if nominated.
>
>
>
> John B.
>
>
>
> On Mar 14, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> The current specs council<http://wiki.openid.net/w/page/12995236/Specifications%20Council> membership
> is:
>
>
>
> · Johnny Bufu - selected by the eligible editors
>
> · Breno de Medeiros - selected by the eligible editors
>
> · Dick Hardt - selected by the board
>
> · Mike Jones - selected by the board
>
> · Nat Sakimura - selected by the eligible editors
>
> · Allen Tom - selected by the eligible editors
>
>
>
> We're currently short one member because David Recordon removed himself
> from the Specs Council in June 2012 and we never replaced him. I propose
> that we fill the open seat with Tim Bray - the editor of the Account
> Chooser spec. I'd spoken to him about the possibility and he's willing to
> serve. Any objections?
>
>
>
> Johnny, Allen, and Dick, I'll also add that none of you have been an
> active editor in the last two years (please correct me if I'm wrong!), so
> by the criteria in the process document (see below), you are no longer
> eligible editors. Therefore, it's probably time to replace you on the
> specs council as well. (Although I do encourage you to express your views
> on the current Mobile Connect Profile working group proposal before the
> specs council - even if it's to state that you have no views.)
>
>
>
> It looks to me like the eligible editors currently are:
>
> · Nat Sakimura - Connect (already serving)
>
> · John Bradley - Connect, Native Applications
>
> · Mike Jones - Connect (already serving)
>
> · Breno de Medeiros - Connect (already serving)
>
> · Chuck Mortimore - Connect
>
> · Tim Bray - Account Chooser
>
> · Naveen Agarwal - Connect Session Management
>
> · Marius Scurtescu - Multiple Response Types (although inactive
> lately)
>
> · Paul Tarjan - Multiple Response Types (although inactive lately)
>
> · Brian Campbell - Form Post Response Mode
>
> · Paul Madsen - Native Applications
>
> · Ashish Jain - Native Applications
>
> · Andy Zmolek - Native Applications (although I've seen no
> working group messages from him)
>
> Some of the Backplane Exchange contributors may also be eligible, but I
> don't have visibility into who the active editors were.
>
>
>
> Of those on you who are eligible editors, who would be interested in
> serving? Two of you will be selected by the other eligible editors and one
> by the board. Also, if I've left somebody out, please let me know who and
> add them to the thread.
>
>
>
> Thanks all,
>
> -- Mike
>
>
>
> As a reminder of the role of the specifications council, here are some of
> the relevant passages from theOpenID Process document<http://openid.net/wordpress-content/uploads/2010/01/OpenID_Process_Document_December_2009_Final_Approved.pdf>
> :
>
>
>
> *1.4* "*Editor(s)*" means, for a particular Specification to be
> developed by a particular WG, the individual Contributor(s) selected to
> coordinate development of, and transcription of the work of the WG for,
> such Specification, as well as (together with any other Editors for that
> WG) to administer WG operation.
>
> *1.5* "*Eligible Editors*" means, as determined on a given date, all
> Editors from current WGs and all other persons who: (a) were WG Editors at
> any time in the two years before such date; (b) are alive and have provided
> and maintained updated contact information with the OpenID Foundation; and
> (c) elect to participate in selection of the Specifications Council after
> at least seven days' email notice.
>
> *1.6* "*Specifications Council*" means a group comprised of: (a) two
> representatives selected by the Board; and (b) five representatives
> selected by the Eligible Editors. The Board may select from among the
> current Board members (or other appropriate persons, as determined by the
> Board), and the Eligible Editors may select from among themselves (or other
> appropriate persons, as the Eligible Editors determine).
>
>
>
> *2 Specifications Council.* The initial Specifications Council, as of
> the date these Processes are adopted, will be comprised of two persons
> selected by the Board and five persons selected by the then-current OpenID
> Authentication 2.0 Specification Editors. The members of the
> Specifications Council will serve for two year terms (although one of the
> initial members selected by the Board and two of the initial members
> selected by the Editors of the OpenID Authentication 2.0 Specification will
> serve for only a one year term - as selected by consensus of the
> Specifications Council - so that Specifications Council membership terms
> may be staggered). There are no "term limits" for Specifications Council
> membership, and the Board or Eligible Editors, as applicable, may re-select
> the same persons to serve for more than one term (consecutive or
> otherwise). In the event that a Specifications Council member failed to
> participate in the discussion of two consecutive working group proposals,
> the member will be deemed to have resigned, and new specifications council
> members who are committed to participating in the process will be appointed
> to replace the member.
>
>
>
> *4.2 Review.* The Specifications Council will review each proposal
> within 15 days after receipt and promptly provide notice to
> specs at openid.net of its recommendation to either accept or reject it,
> together with a brief statement of the rationale for its recommendation
> (including any findings or opinions by the Specifications Council regarding
> the criteria for rejection in the following clauses (a)-(d). If a proposal
> is rejected, it may be modified and resubmitted. The reasons for rejection
> will be limited to:
>
> *(a)* an incomplete Proposal (i.e., failure to comply with §4.1);
>
> *(b)* a determination that the proposal contravenes the OpenID
> community's purpose;
>
> *(c)* a determination that the proposed WG does not have sufficient
> support to succeed or to deliver proposed deliverables within projected
> completion dates; or
>
> *(d)* a determination that the proposal is likely to cause legal
> liability for the OIDF or others.
>
> If no recommendation was issued within 15 days after receipt, the Proposal
> is deemed to be accepted.
>
> When the Specifications Council rejects the proposal, the Proposers may
> submit the Proposal to a vote of the OIDF membership, in accordance with
> the voting procedures in §3. When the vote passes, the proposal is deemed
> to be accepted.
>
>
>
>
>
--
--Breno
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-council/attachments/20140402/aab81998/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the specs-council
mailing list