Open Stack

Alan, Eileen, Mark,

I see there's now a 20 minute slot on the board agenda for this topic.
Could you confirm whether the intent is to reach a decision as planned
during this time slot?

Thanks in advance,
Mark.

On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 05:35 +0100, Russell Bryant wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> I was just looking over the current draft agenda for the October board
> meeting here:
> 
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/26Oct2015BoardMeeting
> 
> I see that the DCO topic is not on the agenda for the formal board
> meeting, but is instead in the joint TC/Board section for an update.
> 
> I left the last board meeting with the understanding and expectation
> that we would be having a vote on this topic in October.  The vote was
> postponed last time as some felt their company's legal counsel needed
> additional time to vet the issue, but that it could be done by October.
>  It was also said that it was no big deal to postpone the vote since it
> would not postpone the implementation since pre-req work was still being
> done.
> 
> We don't have official minutes of the last board meeting, as we'll be
> voting to approve them in October.  The meeting overview from Jonathan
> didn't cover this topic:
> 
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2015-July/002036.html
> 
> but it was covered in a follow-up by Mark McLoughlin and Mark Radcliffe:
> 
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2015-July/002037.html
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2015-July/002038.html
> 
> A few important quotes from Mark Radcliffe's summary:
> 
> "The Board considered the delay of the decision until the next Board
> meeting and then decided to do so."
> 
> ...
> 
> "However, the Board made clear that the decision would be made at the
> next Board meeting and that any discussion with inhouse counsel would
> need to be completed by that date."
> 
> ...
> 
> "The Board approved the continued technical preparation for implementing
> DCO for individual contributions.  Moreover, the Board was also
> influenced by the fact that the deferral of this Board decision to the
> next meeting would not delay the implementation of the DCO procedure, if
> approved, because the earliest that the DCO could be implemented would
> be at the time of the Mitaka release."
> 
> 
> Based on that understanding, I'd like to see this on the regular board
> meeting agenda with a plan for a vote.  If there is reason why it can
> not or should not be, I would love to hear an update from anyone
> involved in discussions that have happened since the last board meeting.
> 
> Thanks,
>