August 2012 - Foundation - lists.openinfra.dev

[OpenStack Foundation] Foundation Minutes - approval needed?
by Rob_Hirschfeld＠Dell.com 18 Sep '12

18 Sep '12

For minutes, should we be approving them as part of our process before they are officially posted? I don't want to add overhead but that helps ensure the board as a whole can vouch for them. -----Original Message----- From: foundation-request(a)lists.openstack.org [mailto:foundation-request@lists.openstack.org] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 7:00 AM To: foundation(a)lists.openstack.org Subject: Foundation Digest, Vol 9, Issue 32 Send Foundation mailing list submissions to foundation(a)lists.openstack.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to foundation-request(a)lists.openstack.org You can reach the person managing the list at foundation-owner(a)lists.openstack.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Foundation digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Board Meeting Tuesday (Mark McLoughlin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:52:49 +0100 From: Mark McLoughlin <markmc(a)redhat.com> To: Jonathan Bryce <jonathan(a)openstack.org> Cc: foundation(a)lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Board Meeting Tuesday Message-ID: <1346334769.7106.1.camel@sorcha> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Jonathan, On Sun, 2012-08-26 at 10:36 -0500, Jonathan Bryce wrote: > The first full Board meeting of the OpenStack Foundation is scheduled > for Tuesday August 28th at 11:00am PDT/1800 UTC. The current draft > agenda is on the wiki: > http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Foundation/Aug2012BoardAgenda > > The agenda contains information that you can use to listen to the > Board meeting online or through a conference dial-in. It also contains > the Gold Member applications of several new companies. Are the minutes of the board meeting going to be posted soon? Thanks, Mark. ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation(a)lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation End of Foundation Digest, Vol 9, Issue 32 *****************************************

5 5

[OpenStack Foundation] Board Meeting Tuesday
by Jonathan Bryce 30 Aug '12

30 Aug '12

The first full Board meeting of the OpenStack Foundation is scheduled for Tuesday August 28th at 11:00am PDT/1800 UTC. The current draft agenda is on the wiki: http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Foundation/Aug2012BoardAgenda The agenda contains information that you can use to listen to the Board meeting online or through a conference dial-in. It also contains the Gold Member applications of several new companies. If anyone has any questions on the meeting or remotely listening in, let me know. Thanks, Jonathan 210-317-2438

2 1

Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Status: Certification of Election Results
by Lloyd Dewolf 27 Aug '12

27 Aug '12

As described the discrepancies have never affected the rankings, and we have full confidence that the published ranked ordering is accurate. The BigPulse engineering explanations, the anonymized votes receipts and exports are consistent with each other. Only a few ballets are affected and, importantly, regardless of the data source used, there is no change to the ranked results. There is no dispute as to the Individual Directors as published. Sincerely, Lloyd

1 0

[OpenStack Foundation] Status: Certification of Election Results
by Lloyd Dewolf 27 Aug '12

27 Aug '12

We (Jim Blair, Lloyd Dewolf, and Vincent Untz) serving as the election inspectors for the "2012 OpenStack Board Election" with polls closing Friday 24 August 2012 17:00 CDT have NOT been able certify the results previously posted as "Preliminary results" at the link https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=2601EKAFniDP554rVJb9RBxx . The acting Secretary Jonathan Bryce has been working with the BigPulse team all weekend and through today to resolve a discrepancy between the Pull Results and the exportable anonymized data. The discrepancy was 28 "voters" from the "Preliminary results", and has never affected the rankings. BigPulse engineering identified the cause as being changing a setting while the polls were open. The discrepancies between BigPulse engineering's updated Poll Results and our own summation scripts applied to the exportable comma-separated values (CSV, ie spreadsheet) are now 1 extra "Voter" for 7 candidates Although we have every confidence that all involved parties have acted in good faith, and have full confidence that the published ranked ordering is accurate, until the results can be "recounted" independently, I, Lloyd Dewolf, cannot certify the results. == Background == Voters who needed to resubmit their ballot were unable to do so because of the combination of settings for weighted voting and splitting votes which locked ballots from being changed. This affected voters who had shared their link with others as well as voters who had a desire to adjust their vote before the poll closed. Acting Secretary Jonathan Bryce sent BigPulse support an email at 10:03am CDT on Monday, August 20. BigPulse asked for a voting link to test, Bryce gave them his and one of their support people called Bryce at 10:51am and told Bryce that because we were using weighted voting, Bryce should disable the "Allow vote splitting" option and it shouldn't affect the outcome. Bryce did that while on the phone and verified that the resent links were working. There is no audit log for setting changes during a poll. == Analysis == Since the polls closed we have not been able to derive a method to duplicate the "Weighted Votes" or "Poll Results" for all candidates shown in the "Preliminary results". As per above, the discrepancy was originally 28 "voters" from the "Preliminary results", and has never affected the rankings. BigPulse engineering identified that BigPulse support gave acting Secretary Jonathan Bryce incorrect advice, and that settings should not have been changed once the poll has started. Although BigPulse engineering has provided updated Poll Results, BigPulse engineering has not yet been able to provide results that we can duplicate from the exportable anonymized data. Sincerely, Lloyd Dewolf

2 1

[OpenStack Foundation] Preliminary Election Results
by Jonathan Bryce 26 Aug '12

26 Aug '12

Hello everyone, The election of Individual Directors has closed. Preliminary results are available at the following link: https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=2601EKAFniDP554rVJb9RBxx These are the raw voting results and are currently uncertified. Our election inspectors (Jim Blair, Lloyd Dewolf, and Vincent Untz) are reviewing the voting data and will provide an update on the status of certification by 11pm CDT August 25th. After the voting results have been certified they will be shared again with the mailing list, and the elected and appointed directors will be seated at 7:00am PDT on August 28th. The results with the Director Diversity requirements applied are listed below. Thank you to everyone who participated in our first Individual Director election. Jonathan 210-317-2438 Preliminary Individual Directors ------------------------------------------- Jesse Andrews Tim Bell Hui Cheng Yujie Du Tristan Goode Rob Hirschfeld Monty Taylor Troy Toman Intended Platinum Directors ----------------------------------------- Alan Clark Jim Curry Eileen Evans Toby Ford Kyle MacDonald Jon Mittelhauser Todd Moore Brian Stevens Intended Gold Directors ------------------------------------------ Simon Anderson Randy Bias Dr. Tzi-cker Chiueh John Igoe Joshua McKenty Boris Renski Sean Roberts Lew Tucker

5 8

[OpenStack Foundation] Individual Member Elections
by Jonathan Bryce 16 Aug '12

16 Aug '12

The OpenStack Foundation has already attracted over 2,000 Individual Members in a little over a week. It's a very exciting moment for all of us involved in this effort, but also brings responsibility for each Individual and Corporate member. We've learned that someone may have violated the basic principles that hold this community together by trying to affect the nominations for the Individual Member elections. This is not what our community stands for, and we do not want to let the actions of one or a few tarnish the reputation of the thousands of individuals who are working to make OpenStack a great place to develop open source software. We are so determined to uphold our values that every member--individual or corporate--agrees to a code of conduct that prohibits abusive behavior and attempts to manipulate our elections. Our bylaws and election process have been defined and overseen by very experienced, independent legal counsel, Mark Radcliffe. We are completely committed to ensuring this process is open, fair and legitimate in accordance with our bylaws and Delaware corporate law. To ensure that the process is open, fair and legitimate, we are looking for individuals who would like to volunteer to be inspectors through the duration of the election to certify the outcome along with our counsel. No more than two affiliated members (working for the same company) can be inspectors, and any candidates who wish to run for election are also ineligible to be inspectors. As stated in the bylaws, "Each inspector, before entering upon the discharge of his duties, shall take and sign an oath to faithfully execute the duties of inspector with strict impartiality and according to the best of his ability." This will require a firm time commitment from any volunteers, as they will need to be available at a number of points through the process to fulfill their duties in a timely manner. If you are interested in being an inspector, let me know. Any complaints or concerns about the election process are taken extremely seriously. Each complaint will be reviewed by our independent counsel and addressed or brought before the full Board at its first meeting as appropriate. To facilitate reporting we have created an email address that is received only by the Foundation's independent counsel for review: electionmonitor(a)openstack.org We are also working on process improvements for nominations and elections--more details on that coming soon. In the meantime, please speak up or contact me or Mark Radcliffe directly if you have any concerns. We have all come a very long way in establishing the OpenStack Foundation--our Foundation--and are right on the threshold of having it up and running. Now is the time for us all to pull together and to make sure we continue to build the kind of inclusive, supportive community that has come so far in the last 2 years. Thanks, Jonathan 210-317-2438

6 10

[OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates
by Jonathan Bryce 16 Aug '12

16 Aug '12

Hi everyone, We've just rolled out a couple of updates to the website to automate the nomination process, display the details of the nominations made, and provide a list of Individual Members of the Foundation (http://www.openstack.org/community/members/). The nomination page lives at the same place (http://www.openstack.org/community/openstack-foundation-board-2012-election…), but now allows you to make your nominations automatically and directly on the page itself. If you wish to nominate new Individual Members who have not been nominated previously visit http://www.openstack.org/community/members/nominate and use the links beside their names. Nominations will continue through next Monday, August 6th. After nominations are closed, we will confirm with each candidate who has received at least 10 nominations that they wish to stand for election. We will also post additional information concerning the candidates and the election process. The candidates will be filling out an application per the bylaws to share more information. As I mentioned in a previous email, we're still defining the questions and all input is welcome. We have had three community members volunteer to help define and administer the election in response to the request for inspectors. If at any point you have questions concerning the nomination or election process, you can contact the inspectors at electioninspectors(a)openstack.org. We have received several hundred nominations across approximately 40 candidates. Thank you all for the feedback and the participation to date, Jonathan

28 126

[OpenStack Foundation] Individual Nominations for Foundation Board of Directors
by Jonathan Bryce 07 Aug '12

07 Aug '12

Hi everyone, Last Wednesday we started accepting Individual Members for the OpenStack Foundation. We've had an excellent response so far with well over 1,000 Individual Members joining in the first week. I wanted to share some important information about how to nominate and elect the Individual Members for the Board of Directors. The deadline to nominate Individual Directors--August 6--is coming very quickly. Directors elected by the Individual Members will make up 1/3 of the Board or 8 of the 24 seats. You must be an Individual Member to nominate, vote or run for an Individual Member position on the Board of Directors. You can become an Individual Member on our website: http://www.openstack.org/join/ Elections for the Individual Directors will take place August 20-24. To vote in the initial Board election, you must join as an Individual Member by August 15. To appear on the ballot, an Individual Member must receive nominations from 10 other Individual Members. The deadline to nominate an Individual Member is August 6, and all nominations are submitted via email to secretary(a)openstack.org. We have created a basic page with initial nominees on it, and will be reaching out to nominees so they can add additional information about themselves. To see who is being nominated so you can support current nominees (who need 10 nominations) or recommend additional candidates, go to http://www.openstack.org/community/openstack-foundation-board-2012-election… Let us know if you have any questions, Jonathan 210-317-2438

12 24

Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates
by Doug Davis 01 Aug '12

01 Aug '12

<hit send too soon> Monty Taylor <mordred(a)inaugust.com> wrote on 08/01/2012 06:27:54 PM: > On 08/01/2012 05:06 PM, Doug Davis wrote: > > IMO, if you work for a platinum/gold company they own you. ;-) > > If we _are_ owned by 100% by our companies, does that mean that your > email here is representative of the thoughts and opinions of IBM? If IBM cared enough about this one thread, you betcha :-) But chances are when something comes before the board the likelihood of our bosses caring will probably be higher than it would be for individual commits or email threads. After all, if being on the board didn't mean that much I doubt people would be paying so much money for it or we'd be having this discussion. -Doug

1 0

Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates
by Rick Clark 01 Aug '12

01 Aug '12

Monty, Nominations are not the same as voting. If you set a bar for nominations, as Openstack has done, transparency is a must so that the process can't be tampered with. I never suggested we vote in the open. In our process, emails were sent to an email address and read by some unknown person, who tabulated them and posted who met the nomination criteria. That is not a good nomination process as it is impossible for a candidate to know if they were unfairly excluded. Rick From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.Monty Taylor <mordred(a)inaugust.com> wrote: On 08/01/2012 04:36 PM, Matt Joyce wrote: >> Yes, I agree. However, I do think that there is already a safety valve >> in there in the board membership cap. Having seen Postgres go to crap >> when all of their core members were employed by EnterpriseDB, I think we >> can safely say that we have learned something about ensuring >> representation is at least spread across different backgrounds. HP and >> Rackspace might have hundreds of foundation members, but they each still >> have a board member cap. Additionally, I might point out, HP and >> Rackspace are the ones running public OpenStack-based clouds at the >> moment ... so they might actually _HAVE_ that many people actually >> working on OpenStack related things. I also don't want to unfairly pick >> on them because they are the ones who have decided to jump all-in on >> this bet. >> > > I think that guarantees diversity in the board. Which is terrific. > But it doesn't eliminate the bias in the membership vote. These are > two different things. Yes- potential membership vote bias is a different thing. Are there any reasonable suggestions as to how to eliminate that in what's supposed to be an open democracy? The US has an extremely complicated voting system for exactly this reason - the original fear was that the large states would effectively have all of the voting and thus all of the representation and that the small states would have a vote in the popular election, but no real representation. This problem is present both in national presidential elections as well as in the make up of the US Congress (with both a proportional and a non-proportional body) It still doesn't prevent people from complaining about disenfranchisement. The problem with democracy comes down to being able to trust the will of the voters. Oddly enough, sometimes different facets of this problem are at odds. The other day, Rick Clark was calling for nominations to all be public. That sounds great on paper, but in actuality secret ballots are done to protect the individual's ability to exercise political agency by having their vote be free from scrutiny of a larger power that may be trying to hold sway over them. Your company, or your union, or your neighborhood mafia boss may want to influence your vote, but if it's not possible to track the content of your vote to you personally, then it's not really a coercible activity. Similarly here - we can talk about HP and Rackspace stacking the deck with tons of voters, but exactly how are they going to force a vote? Anybody notice how if you send out a corporate email to 1000 people, someone is bound to leak it? Anybody notice that such an email would be in violation of the openstack foundation code of conduct? _______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation(a)lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

1 0