From Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com  Thu Nov  1 12:53:53 2018
From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com (Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 12:53:53 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at meeting
In-Reply-To: <B29402EE-5C73-4549-9D82-E575A98DC65A@openstack.org>
References: <B29402EE-5C73-4549-9D82-E575A98DC65A@openstack.org>
Message-ID: <d6a154349a5a46b9be1b0e3d8b7927cd@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>

Jonathan,
Looks like the doc cut several pages between sections 2 and 4.
Can you regenerate new doc that highlights all the changes from current bylaws?
Thanks,
Arkady

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Bryce <jonathan at openstack.org> 
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:03 AM
To: <foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at meeting


[EXTERNAL EMAIL] 
Please report any suspicious attachments, links, or requests for sensitive information.


Hi everyone,

We’ve been working on Bylaws changes and have a draft that’s several revisions in to review today. This is not ready to vote on today. We’d like to vote on it at the Board meeting in Berlin. Today, I’d like to walk through the changes with everyone, see if there’s anything that needs more refinement and be ready to share the proposed amendments with the whole community.

There are 3 basic categories of changes in this draft: 1) changes to support additional projects; 2) changes requested by the Technical Committee; and 3) changes to remove unnecessary corporate startup provisions in the original bylaws.

Thanks!

Jonathan



From christopher.price at ericsson.com  Thu Nov  1 12:56:20 2018
From: christopher.price at ericsson.com (Christopher Price)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 12:56:20 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at meeting
In-Reply-To: <d6a154349a5a46b9be1b0e3d8b7927cd@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
References: <B29402EE-5C73-4549-9D82-E575A98DC65A@openstack.org>
 <d6a154349a5a46b9be1b0e3d8b7927cd@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
Message-ID: <6A1D1F2E-FDF5-415A-B44A-DCD0DDB85945@ericsson.com>

__ 
And here I thought I was being an effective reader...  Agree it would be good to see it in it's complete form.

/ Chris

On 2018-11-01, 13:54, "Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com" <Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com> wrote:

    Jonathan,
    Looks like the doc cut several pages between sections 2 and 4.
    Can you regenerate new doc that highlights all the changes from current bylaws?
    Thanks,
    Arkady
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Jonathan Bryce <jonathan at openstack.org> 
    Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:03 AM
    To: <foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
    Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at meeting
    
    
    [EXTERNAL EMAIL] 
    Please report any suspicious attachments, links, or requests for sensitive information.
    
    
    Hi everyone,
    
    We’ve been working on Bylaws changes and have a draft that’s several revisions in to review today. This is not ready to vote on today. We’d like to vote on it at the Board meeting in Berlin. Today, I’d like to walk through the changes with everyone, see if there’s anything that needs more refinement and be ready to share the proposed amendments with the whole community.
    
    There are 3 basic categories of changes in this draft: 1) changes to support additional projects; 2) changes requested by the Technical Committee; and 3) changes to remove unnecessary corporate startup provisions in the original bylaws.
    
    Thanks!
    
    Jonathan
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    Foundation-board mailing list
    Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
    http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
    


From jonathan at openstack.org  Thu Nov  1 15:26:13 2018
From: jonathan at openstack.org (Jonathan Bryce)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 10:26:13 -0500
Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at meeting
In-Reply-To: <6A1D1F2E-FDF5-415A-B44A-DCD0DDB85945@ericsson.com>
References: <B29402EE-5C73-4549-9D82-E575A98DC65A@openstack.org>
 <d6a154349a5a46b9be1b0e3d8b7927cd@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
 <6A1D1F2E-FDF5-415A-B44A-DCD0DDB85945@ericsson.com>
Message-ID: <7D33982D-A8DB-4F28-80B1-804590681236@openstack.org>

The PDFs I shared publicly removed pages that had no changes to make it easier to spot all the changes. I’m including an attachment here of the most recent version (v7) as a redline from the full bylaws.

Also, note the email you responded to is from last week, so v7 has changes that are not in last week’s revision. This version is also what I sent to the Foundation mailing list for community review.

If you want to isolate just the changes from last week, you can also review my last Board email that has just the most recent round of revisions: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/2018-October/000451.html

Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks,

Jonathan

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Change-Pro Redline - Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v1 and Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v7.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 94525 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181101/f27b6f20/attachment-0001.docx>
-------------- next part --------------


> On Nov 1, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Christopher Price <christopher.price at ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> __ 
> And here I thought I was being an effective reader...  Agree it would be good to see it in it's complete form.
> 
> / Chris
> 
> On 2018-11-01, 13:54, "Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com" <Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com> wrote:
> 
>    Jonathan,
>    Looks like the doc cut several pages between sections 2 and 4.
>    Can you regenerate new doc that highlights all the changes from current bylaws?
>    Thanks,
>    Arkady
> 
>    -----Original Message-----
>    From: Jonathan Bryce <jonathan at openstack.org> 
>    Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:03 AM
>    To: <foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
>    Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at meeting
> 
> 
>    [EXTERNAL EMAIL] 
>    Please report any suspicious attachments, links, or requests for sensitive information.
> 
> 
>    Hi everyone,
> 
>    We’ve been working on Bylaws changes and have a draft that’s several revisions in to review today. This is not ready to vote on today. We’d like to vote on it at the Board meeting in Berlin. Today, I’d like to walk through the changes with everyone, see if there’s anything that needs more refinement and be ready to share the proposed amendments with the whole community.
> 
>    There are 3 basic categories of changes in this draft: 1) changes to support additional projects; 2) changes requested by the Technical Committee; and 3) changes to remove unnecessary corporate startup provisions in the original bylaws.
> 
>    Thanks!
> 
>    Jonathan
> 
> 
>    _______________________________________________
>    Foundation-board mailing list
>    Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
>    http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
> 
> 


From pramchan at yahoo.com  Thu Nov  1 18:01:17 2018
From: pramchan at yahoo.com (prakash RAMCHANDRAN)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 18:01:17 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at me
In-Reply-To: <7D33982D-A8DB-4F28-80B1-804590681236@openstack.org>
References: <B29402EE-5C73-4549-9D82-E575A98DC65A@openstack.org>
 <d6a154349a5a46b9be1b0e3d8b7927cd@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
 <6A1D1F2E-FDF5-415A-B44A-DCD0DDB85945@ericsson.com>
 <7D33982D-A8DB-4F28-80B1-804590681236@openstack.org>
Message-ID: <1774075440.1419351.1541095277793@mail.yahoo.com>

Hi all,
Here are 12 questions which we can review time permitting or fix some offline todayThese are based on Jonathan's v5 document we discussed last meeting.

ThanksPrakash

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 8:26 AM, Jonathan Bryce<jonathan at openstack.org> wrote:   The PDFs I shared publicly removed pages that had no changes to make it easier to spot all the changes. I’m including an attachment here of the most recent version (v7) as a redline from the full bylaws.

Also, note the email you responded to is from last week, so v7 has changes that are not in last week’s revision. This version is also what I sent to the Foundation mailing list for community review.

If you want to isolate just the changes from last week, you can also review my last Board email that has just the most recent round of revisions: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/2018-October/000451.html

Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks,

Jonathan
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181101/6802f214/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: Untitled
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181101/6802f214/attachment.ksh>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: BYLAWS OF THE OPENSTACK FOUNDATION-v.5-comments.txt
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181101/6802f214/attachment.txt>

From jonathan at openstack.org  Thu Nov  1 18:57:57 2018
From: jonathan at openstack.org (Jonathan Bryce)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 13:57:57 -0500
Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at me
In-Reply-To: <1774075440.1419351.1541095277793@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <B29402EE-5C73-4549-9D82-E575A98DC65A@openstack.org>
 <d6a154349a5a46b9be1b0e3d8b7927cd@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
 <6A1D1F2E-FDF5-415A-B44A-DCD0DDB85945@ericsson.com>
 <7D33982D-A8DB-4F28-80B1-804590681236@openstack.org>
 <1774075440.1419351.1541095277793@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <93456391-3C56-4B19-BBDF-7172C54FFAD2@openstack.org>

Hi Prakash,

It looks like several of the questions are asking about the unchanged sections that weren’t included in the PDF redlines. Those are all available in the word doc I sent over this morning, so I think that address Questions 5, 6 and 9. I couldn’t find a Question 8 in your doc, but I’ve added answers for the other questions below


Q1. Are OIP MC members and OIP TC members considered for the purpose of code of conduct & compliances meeting the requirements same as Openstack TC members?

A1. Yes. The Open Infrastructure Projects' committee members are included explicitly in the amended version of 4.20


Q2. Notes: Individual members the limit is?

A2. There is no limit on the number of individual members. This is stated in 2.2(c)


Q3. Note (c) is being dropped & (e) is being added for TC

A3. I don’t understand what the question is here. 4.13(c) and (e) are unrelated. The original “mediator” clause of 4.13(c) was moved to the Technical Member Policy 2(d) to put it more directly under the TC section. 4.13(e) has to do with new Open Infrastructure Projects.


Q4. Note 4.14(c) is not being dropped? Why is it different for UC? but (f) is added?

A4. This was changed between the version from last week (v5) and the version from this week (v7). The UC and the TC provisions are now aligned here.


Q7. Does 7.1 eith CLA says it will ensure Apache Lince 2.0 and same is contradicted in (c) Board may approve licenses other that Apache license 2.0? Any explaination as what this means for usage of code  restrictive versus non-restrictive usage?

A7. ASL 2.0 has been a principle for the OpenStack from the projects since the beginning. This leaves that in place and adds 7.1(c) which would allow non-OpenStack projects that the Foundation is hosting to use a different OSI-approved license besides ASL 2.0


Q10. Needs some explanation on the background to this change? Is this the amendment replacing (TC earlier reference: Q3. Note (c) is being dropped & (e) is being added for TC)
Noted as in 9.2(d) above: The amendment of the Technical Committee Member Policy shall require the affirmative vote of the majority of the Board of Directors and the majority of the Technical Committee.

A10. This is not directly related to 4.13(c) and (e), but rather with putting the TC Member Policy under the joint control of the Board of Directors and the Technical Committee. As the Foundation membership has grown to include tens of thousands of individuals, meeting the very high bar amendment requirement is not something that we can do on a frequent basis and has made it difficult to correct simple errors like the typo in the TC Member Policy. Also, as the membership of the Foundation grows beyond solely the OpenStack project, it doesn’t necessarily make sense to have the entire membership body vote on OpenStack TC-specific items.


Q11. Note that to get elected/nominated as TC member you must be activeIndividual member and once elected and start serving during the course you as Individual member can resign, without loosing your position and Board finds a replacement. Is this correct?

A11. To be nominated/elected one must be an active Individual Member of the Foundation. If during the term they cease to be an Individual Member of the Foundation, they can continue during that Term. There is no need to find a replacement.


Q12. Does everyone confirm that siteen month term for TC will be revised starting Jan 2019 to 12 months and election cycle will be adjusted to 8 months?

This section has been rewritten in the most recent version (v7) to capture the outcome of the discussion last week. The election cycles will continue to be set by the TC with the requirement that they must happen twice a year (these are normally around development cycles and therefore are not on a perfectly regular cadence). The terms will vary slightly because of this and need to be published at election time, otherwise they default to 12 months.




> On Nov 1, 2018, at 1:01 PM, prakash RAMCHANDRAN <pramchan at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Here are 12 questions which we can review time permitting or fix some offline today
> These are based on Jonathan's v5 document we discussed last meeting.
> 
> Thanks
> Prakash
> 
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> 
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 8:26 AM, Jonathan Bryce
> <jonathan at openstack.org> wrote:
> The PDFs I shared publicly removed pages that had no changes to make it easier to spot all the changes. I’m including an attachment here of the most recent version (v7) as a redline from the full bylaws.
> 
> Also, note the email you responded to is from last week, so v7 has changes that are not in last week’s revision. This version is also what I sent to the Foundation mailing list for community review.
> 
> If you want to isolate just the changes from last week, you can also review my last Board email that has just the most recent round of revisions: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/2018-October/000451.html
> 
> Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks,
> 
> 
> Jonathan
> <Untitled.txt><BYLAWS OF THE OPENSTACK FOUNDATION-v.5-comments.txt>



From jonathan at openstack.org  Thu Nov  1 19:00:36 2018
From: jonathan at openstack.org (Jonathan Bryce)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 14:00:36 -0500
Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at meeting
In-Reply-To: <6F9483DD-482B-4D3B-A04C-D415790DA1C7@cisco.com>
References: <B29402EE-5C73-4549-9D82-E575A98DC65A@openstack.org>
 <6F9483DD-482B-4D3B-A04C-D415790DA1C7@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <FE703441-6509-4B87-9FA5-416680B40183@openstack.org>

Hi Steven,

The request was not specifically for 8/16 month schedules but more to find a way to add flexibility to the timing and term length since those are attached to development cycles. Currently the Bylaws lay out a 6 month elections and 1 year terms, but there is usually some slight variation from those because of the length of cycles. 8 months seemed to be the safe upper limit and that’s what went in the first draft, but this section has been re-written in the most recent version I sent around this week. Let me know if you have other questions.

Thanks,

Jonathan



> On Oct 29, 2018, at 12:14 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Jonathan,
> 
> I was on PTO in Scottland (actually on an airplane at the time).  I see the TC requested changes to 8/16 months schedules.  I could speculate as to why, but could someone expand?
> 
> Thanks
> -steve
> 
> 
> On 10/25/18, 6:03 AM, "Jonathan Bryce" <jonathan at openstack.org> wrote:
> 
>    Hi everyone,
> 
>    We’ve been working on Bylaws changes and have a draft that’s several revisions in to review today. This is not ready to vote on today. We’d like to vote on it at the Board meeting in Berlin. Today, I’d like to walk through the changes with everyone, see if there’s anything that needs more refinement and be ready to share the proposed amendments with the whole community.
> 
>    There are 3 basic categories of changes in this draft: 1) changes to support additional projects; 2) changes requested by the Technical Committee; and 3) changes to remove unnecessary corporate startup provisions in the original bylaws.
> 
>    Thanks!
> 
>    Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> 



From Anni.Lai at huawei.com  Thu Nov  1 20:01:52 2018
From: Anni.Lai at huawei.com (Anni Lai)
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 20:01:52 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at meeting
In-Reply-To: <FE703441-6509-4B87-9FA5-416680B40183@openstack.org>
References: <B29402EE-5C73-4549-9D82-E575A98DC65A@openstack.org>
 <6F9483DD-482B-4D3B-A04C-D415790DA1C7@cisco.com>
 <FE703441-6509-4B87-9FA5-416680B40183@openstack.org>
Message-ID: <31ECD4E1A0C9AA449EFF026969B3802544E85D61@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com>

Hi,

What's the dial-in for today's Board meeting? This is all I see on my calendar invite. Thanks.

At the 25 October board meeting it was requested that we schedule an additional short meeting in case any Directors have additional questions or comments after additional review of the bylaw changes.
 
This meeting is to address that request.
 
Date: November 1
Time: 1pm pacific
Location:  http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Foundation

Thanks,

Anni



-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Bryce [mailto:jonathan at openstack.org] 
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 12:01 PM
To: Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com>
Cc: <foundation-board at lists.openstack.org> <foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation Board] Bylaws draft changes for review at meeting

Hi Steven,

The request was not specifically for 8/16 month schedules but more to find a way to add flexibility to the timing and term length since those are attached to development cycles. Currently the Bylaws lay out a 6 month elections and 1 year terms, but there is usually some slight variation from those because of the length of cycles. 8 months seemed to be the safe upper limit and that’s what went in the first draft, but this section has been re-written in the most recent version I sent around this week. Let me know if you have other questions.

Thanks,

Jonathan



> On Oct 29, 2018, at 12:14 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Jonathan,
> 
> I was on PTO in Scottland (actually on an airplane at the time).  I see the TC requested changes to 8/16 months schedules.  I could speculate as to why, but could someone expand?
> 
> Thanks
> -steve
> 
> 
> On 10/25/18, 6:03 AM, "Jonathan Bryce" <jonathan at openstack.org> wrote:
> 
>    Hi everyone,
> 
>    We’ve been working on Bylaws changes and have a draft that’s several revisions in to review today. This is not ready to vote on today. We’d like to vote on it at the Board meeting in Berlin. Today, I’d like to walk through the changes with everyone, see if there’s anything that needs more refinement and be ready to share the proposed amendments with the whole community.
> 
>    There are 3 basic categories of changes in this draft: 1) changes to support additional projects; 2) changes requested by the Technical Committee; and 3) changes to remove unnecessary corporate startup provisions in the original bylaws.
> 
>    Thanks!
> 
>    Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> 


_______________________________________________
Foundation-board mailing list
Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board

From Mark.Radcliffe at dlapiper.com  Fri Nov  2 00:43:20 2018
From: Mark.Radcliffe at dlapiper.com (Radcliffe, Mark)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2018 00:43:20 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Cumulative Redline
Message-ID: <E682AA2FC88ADD4589420BFC6BE3A92142D1F061@SANDMBX01v.piper.root.local>

I am enclosing a redline to the existing version of the bylaws and includes all of the changes, including the changes recommended today (based on a discussion with Jonathan, we slightly modified the last sentence rather than deleting it: we  deleted the reference to twelve months but kept the rest of the sentence).  Please feel free to call or have your counsel call me with any questions.




Please consider the environment before printing this email.

The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or legally privileged. It has been sent for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender and destroy all copies of the message. To contact us directly, send to postmaster at dlapiper.com. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181102/33a46d24/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v8.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 71632 bytes
Desc: Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v8.docx
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181102/33a46d24/attachment-0002.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Change-Pro Redline - Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v1 and Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v8.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 94539 bytes
Desc: Change-Pro Redline - Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v1 and Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v8.docx
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181102/33a46d24/attachment-0003.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Change-Pro Redline Pages - Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v1 and Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v8.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 82028 bytes
Desc: Change-Pro Redline Pages - Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v1 and Bylaws of the Openstack Foundation (2018)-283699379-v8.pdf
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181102/33a46d24/attachment-0001.pdf>

From allison at lohutok.net  Fri Nov  2 07:44:34 2018
From: allison at lohutok.net (Allison Randal)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2018 07:44:34 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Cumulative Redline
In-Reply-To: <E682AA2FC88ADD4589420BFC6BE3A92142D1F061@SANDMBX01v.piper.root.local>
References: <E682AA2FC88ADD4589420BFC6BE3A92142D1F061@SANDMBX01v.piper.root.local>
Message-ID: <f9ca4b81-ab03-509c-3490-c8a72a61c3fe@lohutok.net>

This looks great, I like the "in two phases" wording in the TC election
section, it nicely resolves the ambiguity.

Thanks,
Allison

On 11/02/2018 12:43 AM, Radcliffe, Mark wrote:
> I am enclosing a redline to the existing version of the bylaws and
> includes all of the changes, including the changes recommended today
> (based on a discussion with Jonathan, we slightly modified the last
> sentence rather than deleting it: we  deleted the reference to twelve
> months but kept the rest of the sentence).  Please feel free to call or
> have your counsel call me with any questions.
>  
>  
>  
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
> 
> The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or
> legally privileged. It has been sent for the sole use of the intended
> recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not an intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use,
> disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
> communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you
> have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender
> and destroy all copies of the message. To contact us directly, send to
> postmaster at dlapiper.com. Thank you.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation-board mailing list
> Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
> 


From markmc at redhat.com  Fri Nov  2 11:51:52 2018
From: markmc at redhat.com (Mark McLoughlin)
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2018 11:51:52 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Cumulative Redline
In-Reply-To: <E682AA2FC88ADD4589420BFC6BE3A92142D1F061@SANDMBX01v.piper.root.local>
References: <E682AA2FC88ADD4589420BFC6BE3A92142D1F061@SANDMBX01v.piper.root.local>
Message-ID: <CANDZdqaUCOnataygCbRYy7f+9WOZh1k5jc0Ut6AWVJoCrkAvig@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for sending, and apologies for not being able to make yesterday's
meeting.

The changes all look sensible and logical to me. +1

One thing I think we need to be prepared to explain clearly to the wider
community - the OpenStack project continues to have a sort of special
status under the OSF, and it's not treated exactly the same as Open
Infrastructure Projects in the bylaws. I guess we need to be clear on the
rationale for that, and any practical implications of that.

Thanks,
Mark.

On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 12:43 AM Radcliffe, Mark <Mark.Radcliffe at dlapiper.com>
wrote:

> I am enclosing a redline to the existing version of the bylaws and
> includes all of the changes, including the changes recommended today (based
> on a discussion with Jonathan, we slightly modified the last sentence
> rather than deleting it: we  deleted the reference to twelve months but
> kept the rest of the sentence).  Please feel free to call or have your
> counsel call me with any questions.
>
>
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
> The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or legally
> privileged. It has been sent for the sole use of the intended recipient(s).
> If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination,
> distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please reply to the sender and destroy all copies of the message. To
> contact us directly, send to postmaster at dlapiper.com. Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation-board mailing list
> Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181102/d77d7ca6/attachment.html>

From ACLARK at suse.com  Thu Nov 15 15:01:34 2018
From: ACLARK at suse.com (Alan Clark)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:01:34 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
Message-ID: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>

Please respond by November 30.

Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.

Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.

I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.

These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology. 

Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.

Regards,
AlanClark 

From Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com  Thu Nov 15 15:08:28 2018
From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com (Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:08:28 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <ea70a466b93241a9a24363e1dcb914f1@AUSX13MPS304.AMER.DELL.COM>

I will second it.
And thank you to D-Telecom for hosting Board Monday.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Clark [mailto:ACLARK at suse.com] 
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2018 9:02 AM
To: foundation-board
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines


[EXTERNAL EMAIL] 

Please respond by November 30.

Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.

Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.

I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.

These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology. 

Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.

Regards,
AlanClark 
_______________________________________________
Foundation-board mailing list
Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board

From clemens.hardewig at crandale.de  Thu Nov 15 15:22:32 2018
From: clemens.hardewig at crandale.de (=?windows-1252?Q?Clemens_Hardewig?=)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:22:32 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <kcis.4F3118CBC59F4D50BE510E4AB2DC585B@kopano.zuhause.xx>

Hi Alan,

I am happy to support this activity from my side!

BR Clemens

Von meinem iPhone gesendet

> Am 15.11.2018 um 16:02 schrieb Alan Clark <ACLARK at suse.com>:
> 
> Please respond by November 30.
> 
> Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.
> 
> Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.
> 
> I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.
> 
> These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology. 
> 
> Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.
> 
> Regards,
> AlanClark 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation-board mailing list
> Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board



From pramchan at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 15 15:28:49 2018
From: pramchan at yahoo.com (prakash RAMCHANDRAN)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:28:49 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <2028452076.1068478.1542295729032@mail.yahoo.com>

Alan,
Glad to see the first Bylaws part of OIP addressed by Board successfully.
For now we can draft a document call it Best practice & Guidelines for evaluating Pilot Projects to onboard as a confirmed project within OIP.
Thus we need a simple Life cycle to be defined for an OIP project.
1) Pilot phase2) Evaluation or Reevaluation phase.3) Confirmation and Graduated to be Run as OIP project.4) Rating based on adaption and Define scale of Maturity5) Terminate, Archive and / or merge into other OIP or OpenStack project or projects.
Each of this 5 phase can have some matrix to measure and commitee assigned can define that. Matrix should include both Technology and Market coments to qualify in all 5 phases.
I can certainly pitch in and certainly let's get Chris Price from Ericsson bring his experience from OPNFV to best on it.
This will need a private wiki page or confluence and OSF staff should be able to facilitate that.
Please go ahead and get one quick call to assign a 3-5 member committee that can include 2 SP, 2 platinum or Gold reps and 1 Semi conductor vendor like Intel to get this moving and let's get a preliminary draft before next year end.
We need to have clear road map by CYQ1 to ensure we keep the good work done and let the stats by our Branding team het us some inputs through survey.
Rest on call.
ThanksPrakash


Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Alan Clark<ACLARK at suse.com> wrote:   Please respond by November 30.

Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.

Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.

I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.

These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology. 

Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.

Regards,
AlanClark 
_______________________________________________
Foundation-board mailing list
Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181115/efd3db54/attachment.html>

From kk0563 at att.com  Thu Nov 15 15:55:48 2018
From: kk0563 at att.com (KATHIRVEL, KANDAN)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:55:48 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <8F1DF358-0AE0-4253-BB4B-62552A05905A@att.com>

Alan,

Thank you.

I would like to participate.

Regards 
Kandan 

> On Nov 15, 2018, at 4:02 PM, Alan Clark <ACLARK at suse.com> wrote:
> 
> Please respond by November 30.
> 
> Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.
> 
> Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.
> 
> I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.
> 
> These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology. 
> 
> Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.
> 
> Regards,
> AlanClark 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation-board mailing list
> Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_foundation-2Dboard&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=GcYjAPBoGgU7iAKNjybFzw&m=-13Xi-uYaIqCUPbmdPYqSMqdUg4Pak-XNMLRiQccg1E&s=hvKbbSx1MJMhy0q6pXRi7NyIeh75MegBCu7Ns5aE2w8&e=


From Anni.Lai at huawei.com  Fri Nov 16 01:52:41 2018
From: Anni.Lai at huawei.com (Anni Lai)
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 01:52:41 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <8F1DF358-0AE0-4253-BB4B-62552A05905A@att.com>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
 <8F1DF358-0AE0-4253-BB4B-62552A05905A@att.com>
Message-ID: <31ECD4E1A0C9AA449EFF026969B3802544E92BE1@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com>

Alan,

Please count me in. 

Thank you,

Anni

-----Original Message-----
From: KATHIRVEL, KANDAN [mailto:kk0563 at att.com] 
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2018 7:56 AM
To: Alan Clark <ACLARK at suse.com>
Cc: foundation-board <foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines

Alan,

Thank you.

I would like to participate.

Regards 
Kandan 

> On Nov 15, 2018, at 4:02 PM, Alan Clark <ACLARK at suse.com> wrote:
> 
> Please respond by November 30.
> 
> Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.
> 
> Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.
> 
> I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.
> 
> These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology. 
> 
> Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.
> 
> Regards,
> AlanClark 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation-board mailing list
> Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_foundation-2Dboard&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=GcYjAPBoGgU7iAKNjybFzw&m=-13Xi-uYaIqCUPbmdPYqSMqdUg4Pak-XNMLRiQccg1E&s=hvKbbSx1MJMhy0q6pXRi7NyIeh75MegBCu7Ns5aE2w8&e=

_______________________________________________
Foundation-board mailing list
Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board

From markmc at redhat.com  Tue Nov 20 06:39:18 2018
From: markmc at redhat.com (Mark McLoughlin)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 06:39:18 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <CANDZdqZ3H=LtvZ1Wex9VbEG6ZBdCGGFZ9F5kpjpNNdPQsRPEbQ@mail.gmail.com>

Count me in, Alan.

Thanks,
Mark.

On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 3:02 PM Alan Clark <ACLARK at suse.com> wrote:

> Please respond by November 30.
>
> Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint
> leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for
> our community for years to come.
>
> Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define
> guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.
>
> I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the
> board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the
> strategic project process.
>
> These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the
> OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects
> grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology.
>
> Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work
> effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call
> where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine
> a path forward.
>
> Regards,
> AlanClark
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation-board mailing list
> Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181120/23e15265/attachment.html>

From eric.guo at easystack.cn  Tue Nov 20 08:16:55 2018
From: eric.guo at easystack.cn (=?GBK?B?ufmzpLKo?=)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 16:16:55 +0800 (CST)
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <62ad5540.21c88.167303195b8.Coremail.eric.guo@easystack.cn>

Alan,
Thank you. I would like to participate.--

顺颂商祺

Eric Guo  郭长波
Senior Director Of Engineering & Community Director


From: "Alan Clark" <ACLARK at suse.com>
Date: 2018-11-15 23:01:34
To:  foundation-board <foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines>Please respond by November 30.
>
>Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.
>
>Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.
>
>I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.
>
>These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology. 
>
>Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.
>
>Regards,
>AlanClark 
>_______________________________________________
>Foundation-board mailing list
>Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181120/0c2fdc33/attachment-0001.html>

From pramchan at yahoo.com  Sat Nov 24 01:06:16 2018
From: pramchan at yahoo.com (prakash RAMCHANDRAN)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 01:06:16 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <2028452076.1068478.1542295729032@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
 <2028452076.1068478.1542295729032@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <199906406.1858763.1543021576164@mail.yahoo.com>

Alan & foundation-board,
 Took some time to think over the OIP process. Confirmation guide lines as you call, needs a pipeline to identity how we reached here in first place and how would we repeat it with success for future OIP efforts 
Attached here in the first simple draft to brainstorm at next meeting. Please feel free to amend and update to arrive at a version that can be tested on one or two Pilots in pipe line to finalize the procedures before releasing first version to existing OIP pilots.

ThanksPrakash Ramchandran+14084065810


Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 7:28 AM, prakash RAMCHANDRAN<pramchan at yahoo.com> wrote:   Alan,
Glad to see the first Bylaws part of OIP addressed by Board successfully.
For now we can draft a document call it Best practice & Guidelines for evaluating Pilot Projects to onboard as a confirmed project within OIP.
Thus we need a simple Life cycle to be defined for an OIP project.
1) Pilot phase2) Evaluation or Reevaluation phase.3) Confirmation and Graduated to be Run as OIP project.4) Rating based on adaption and Define scale of Maturity5) Terminate, Archive and / or merge into other OIP or OpenStack project or projects.
Each of this 5 phase can have some matrix to measure and commitee assigned can define that. Matrix should include both Technology and Market coments to qualify in all 5 phases.
I can certainly pitch in and certainly let's get Chris Price from Ericsson bring his experience from OPNFV to best on it.
This will need a private wiki page or confluence and OSF staff should be able to facilitate that.
Please go ahead and get one quick call to assign a 3-5 member committee that can include 2 SP, 2 platinum or Gold reps and 1 Semi conductor vendor like Intel to get this moving and let's get a preliminary draft before next year end.
We need to have clear road map by CYQ1 to ensure we keep the good work done and let the stats by our Branding team het us some inputs through survey.
Rest on call.
ThanksPrakash


Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Alan Clark<ACLARK at suse.com> wrote:   Please respond by November 30.

Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.

Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.

I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.

These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology. 

Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.

Regards,
AlanClark 
_______________________________________________
Foundation-board mailing list
Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
  
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181124/984fc258/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OIP_Strawman_Proposal-V1.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 144240 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181124/984fc258/attachment-0001.pdf>

From christopher.price at est.tech  Mon Nov 26 09:17:28 2018
From: christopher.price at est.tech (Christopher Price)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 09:17:28 +0000
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <199906406.1858763.1543021576164@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
 <2028452076.1068478.1542295729032@mail.yahoo.com>
 <199906406.1858763.1543021576164@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <B5DF00E7-8D2E-403D-BD11-E186EC1EA3E5@est.tech>

Hi Prakash,

Thank you for kick-starting this dialog and putting forward a proposal to get the ball rolling.

I have looked at the document and the first thing that struck me was the potentially significant amount of work involved in establishing these matrix for evaluation and determination.  I hold some concerns that such a data matrix may make it difficult for incubating projects to have an understanding on what is expected of them to achieve promotion.  I’m a big fan of simple, especially when it comes to setting expectations on a diverse group of people. :)

There would be some value in looking at these metrics and trying to boil them down to a set of principals for projects to follow, with a (hopefully) simple method of evaluating the projects adherence in order that the communities are aware of the boards expectations and there can be little confusion on how to achieve them.  I noticed your document, rightly, highlights the “four opens” as a set of expectations, this might be a good starting point for which to build consumable messaging on how “project confirmation” can be achieved and evaluated.

I feel that we will need to try and make what is a complex topic as simple as possible in order that we do not confuse or alienate potential projects.  Let’s discuss in the meetings Alan will propose, I’m keen to hear others thoughts on this topic.

Regards,
                Chris

From: prakash RAMCHANDRAN <pramchan at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: "pramchan at yahoo.com" <pramchan at yahoo.com>
Date: Saturday, 24 November 2018 at 02:06
To: "ACLARK at suse.com" <ACLARK at suse.com>, foundation-board <foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines

Alan & foundation-board,

 Took some time to think over the OIP process. Confirmation guide lines as you call, needs a pipeline to identity how we reached here in first place and how would we repeat it with success for future OIP efforts

Attached here in the first simple draft to brainstorm at next meeting. Please feel free to amend and update to arrive at a version that can be tested on one or two Pilots in pipe line to finalize the procedures before releasing first version to existing OIP pilots.


Thanks
Prakash Ramchandran
+14084065810



Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature>

On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 7:28 AM, prakash RAMCHANDRAN
<pramchan at yahoo.com> wrote:
Alan,

Glad to see the first Bylaws part of OIP addressed by Board successfully.

For now we can draft a document call it Best practice & Guidelines for evaluating Pilot Projects to onboard as a confirmed project within OIP.

Thus we need a simple Life cycle to be defined for an OIP project.

1) Pilot phase
2) Evaluation or Reevaluation phase.
3) Confirmation and Graduated to be Run as OIP project.
4) Rating based on adaption and Define scale of Maturity
5) Terminate, Archive and / or merge into other OIP or OpenStack project or projects.

Each of this 5 phase can have some matrix to measure and commitee assigned can define that. Matrix should include both Technology and Market coments to qualify in all 5 phases.

I can certainly pitch in and certainly let's get Chris Price from Ericsson bring his experience from OPNFV to best on it.

This will need a private wiki page or confluence and OSF staff should be able to facilitate that.

Please go ahead and get one quick call to assign a 3-5 member committee that can include 2 SP, 2 platinum or Gold reps and 1 Semi conductor vendor like Intel to get this moving and let's get a preliminary draft before next year end.

We need to have clear road map by CYQ1 to ensure we keep the good work done and let the stats by our Branding team het us some inputs through survey.

Rest on call.

Thanks
Prakash


Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature>

On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Alan Clark
<ACLARK at suse.com> wrote:
Please respond by November 30.

Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.

Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.

I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.

These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology.

Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.

Regards,
AlanClark
_______________________________________________
Foundation-board mailing list
Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181126/4e01079d/attachment-0001.html>

From clemens.hardewig at crandale.de  Mon Nov 26 16:55:21 2018
From: clemens.hardewig at crandale.de (Clemens)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 17:55:21 +0100
Subject: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
In-Reply-To: <B5DF00E7-8D2E-403D-BD11-E186EC1EA3E5@est.tech>
References: <50disr-5j9ml2qy0eie9qta9az0pe1b-85qtjk7its6i-bv5ch34fva0rkk16hd-emltqmx079tc7k0uw3t699ogp5ypxy-g4oxwavck4ydpy55l3-4zwl1cuc5946-udc94g-l3cefm-9q7ryggkarav.1542294092138@email.android.com>
 <2028452076.1068478.1542295729032@mail.yahoo.com>
 <199906406.1858763.1543021576164@mail.yahoo.com>
 <B5DF00E7-8D2E-403D-BD11-E186EC1EA3E5@est.tech>
Message-ID: <4D9A9602-231F-4D11-9DDA-6ECC5A0B5DCD@crandale.de>

Hi Prakash,

thanks for the first input to this topic.

I tend to support Christophers feedback that we need to create a very simple structure which facilitates a fast and transparent decision making process whether a dedicated project qualifies for the different stages an OIP can have. 

From my perspective a start could be to consider the different project types; proposal could be:
Projects which have already a history outside of the Openstack community and have reached a dedicated level of maturity though
Projects in very early stages, having eg a concept or a very first spec yet but not necessarily working code
which might then need a different assessment logic

Based on that, I would suggest a structure
To define/identify/complement the bodies of the OSF as described in the bylaws which shall be involved/manage a project; 
A project can already have a good working structure which then simply continues
New/to-be-modified management structures for  projects could get advice from some best practice project management templates
To detail a stage model those projects undergo through its lifecycle and define toll gates in more detail 
To create simple check lists with not more than 10 items each giving to the members of the bodies some orientation which criteria shall be concluded whether a project may pass the toll gate; the judgement is then indeed up to the individuals and may lead to (wanted!) discussions in the bodies

The checklists should consider only some very few simple areas
Value that the project can provide to OI namespace (links to other projects, enrichments for existing projects etc.) and strengthen its mission 
Value that the OI namespace is providing to the project
Formal (technical) criteria like working structure, ecosystem competition, code quality, fit for purpose development approach etc.

I currently assume that with such a structure, a flexible, feasible, transparent and speedy process can be established to facilitate fast conclusions on OIPs; perhaps it could be a good starter and could be extended if needed at a later stage

Happy to discuss

BR C

> Am 26.11.2018 um 10:17 schrieb Christopher Price <christopher.price at est.tech>:
> 
> Hi Prakash,
>  
> Thank you for kick-starting this dialog and putting forward a proposal to get the ball rolling.
>  
> I have looked at the document and the first thing that struck me was the potentially significant amount of work involved in establishing these matrix for evaluation and determination.  I hold some concerns that such a data matrix may make it difficult for incubating projects to have an understanding on what is expected of them to achieve promotion.  I’m a big fan of simple, especially when it comes to setting expectations on a diverse group of people. :)
>  
> There would be some value in looking at these metrics and trying to boil them down to a set of principals for projects to follow, with a (hopefully) simple method of evaluating the projects adherence in order that the communities are aware of the boards expectations and there can be little confusion on how to achieve them.  I noticed your document, rightly, highlights the “four opens” as a set of expectations, this might be a good starting point for which to build consumable messaging on how “project confirmation” can be achieved and evaluated.
>  
> I feel that we will need to try and make what is a complex topic as simple as possible in order that we do not confuse or alienate potential projects.  Let’s discuss in the meetings Alan will propose, I’m keen to hear others thoughts on this topic.
>  
> Regards,
>                 Chris
>  
> From: prakash RAMCHANDRAN <pramchan at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: "pramchan at yahoo.com" <pramchan at yahoo.com>
> Date: Saturday, 24 November 2018 at 02:06
> To: "ACLARK at suse.com" <ACLARK at suse.com>, foundation-board <foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation Board] Call to develop the confirmation guidelines
>  
> Alan & foundation-board,
>  
>  Took some time to think over the OIP process. Confirmation guide lines as you call, needs a pipeline to identity how we reached here in first place and how would we repeat it with success for future OIP efforts 
>  
> Attached here in the first simple draft to brainstorm at next meeting. Please feel free to amend and update to arrive at a version that can be tested on one or two Pilots in pipe line to finalize the procedures before releasing first version to existing OIP pilots.
>  
>  
> Thanks
> Prakash Ramchandran
> +14084065810
>  
>  
>  
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature>
>  
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 7:28 AM, prakash RAMCHANDRAN
> <pramchan at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Alan, 
>  
> Glad to see the first Bylaws part of OIP addressed by Board successfully.
>  
> For now we can draft a document call it Best practice & Guidelines for evaluating Pilot Projects to onboard as a confirmed project within OIP.
>  
> Thus we need a simple Life cycle to be defined for an OIP project.
>  
> 1) Pilot phase
> 2) Evaluation or Reevaluation phase.
> 3) Confirmation and Graduated to be Run as OIP project.
> 4) Rating based on adaption and Define scale of Maturity
> 5) Terminate, Archive and / or merge into other OIP or OpenStack project or projects.
>  
> Each of this 5 phase can have some matrix to measure and commitee assigned can define that. Matrix should include both Technology and Market coments to qualify in all 5 phases.
>  
> I can certainly pitch in and certainly let's get Chris Price from Ericsson bring his experience from OPNFV to best on it.
>  
> This will need a private wiki page or confluence and OSF staff should be able to facilitate that.
>  
> Please go ahead and get one quick call to assign a 3-5 member committee that can include 2 SP, 2 platinum or Gold reps and 1 Semi conductor vendor like Intel to get this moving and let's get a preliminary draft before next year end.
>  
> We need to have clear road map by CYQ1 to ensure we keep the good work done and let the stats by our Branding team het us some inputs through survey.
>  
> Rest on call.
>  
> Thanks
> Prakash
>  
>  
> 
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature>
>  
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Alan Clark
> <ACLARK at suse.com> wrote:
> Please respond by November 30.
>  
> Directors, thank you for your leadership at this week's board and joint leadership meetings. The resolutions we passed will be a pivotal point for our community for years to come.
>  
> Now, as a board, we have some additional work to undertake to define guidelines that we as a board will use to help confirm pilot projects.
>  
> I would like to launch a new board work effort to define guidelines the board can use to fulfill our confirmation responsibilities as part of the strategic project process.
>  
> These guidelines will be a key tool for us to ensure that we and the OpenStack Foundation will be in a proper position to help these projects grow, thrive and succeed as an open source community driven technology.
>  
> Please let me know if you are interested in participating in this work effort.  Once I know those who are interested, I will setup a kickoff call where we can determine who would like to chair this effort and to determine a path forward.
>  
> Regards,
> AlanClark 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation-board mailing list
> Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org <mailto:Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board>_______________________________________________
> Foundation-board mailing list
> Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181126/e90c7c53/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3783 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation-board/attachments/20181126/e90c7c53/attachment-0001.bin>