From alanclark at openstack.org  Tue Apr  2 13:43:13 2019
From: alanclark at openstack.org (Alan Clark)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 07:43:13 -0600
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's
	OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure
	project confirmation
Message-ID: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>

As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus and as the
associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the OpenStack board desires
to do its part in helping the projects thrive and grow.  A key step in
project advancement is the project confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation
will enable the Foundation to apply additional Foundation resources towards
that project.  In support of this process, the board at its last meeting,
approved the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines
point out, many factors go into the board's decisions.  To ensure that the
board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to the needs
and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board will further
discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as follows: (changed text in
italics).

 

4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the
candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, and discuss the
review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, the Board of Directors
shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via remote
teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the Board of
Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request other
information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate
Law.

 

If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels that
there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this amendment
provides a mechanism for such discussion.

 

Thanks,

Alan Clark

 

 

[1]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmation
Guidelines

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190402/57827a99/attachment-0001.html>

From Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com  Tue Apr  2 13:49:33 2019
From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com (Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 13:49:33 +0000
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next
	week's	OpenStack board meeting to support Open
	Infrastructure	project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
Message-ID: <423268e6d25e483b85c9dc9977b67672@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>

Sounds like a good change.
Alan,
Do you propose we vote on it at Denver?
Thanks,
Arkady

From: Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 8:43 AM
To: foundation at lists.openstack.org; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation


[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus and as the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the OpenStack board desires to do its part in helping the projects thrive and grow.  A key step in project advancement is the project confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation will enable the Foundation to apply additional Foundation resources towards that project.  In support of this process, the board at its last meeting, approved the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines point out, many factors go into the board's decisions.  To ensure that the board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as follows: (changed text in italics).

4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, and discuss the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, the Board of Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via remote teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the Board of Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request other information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate Law.

If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.

Thanks,
Alan Clark


[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190402/a33f5c4f/attachment.html>

From sean.mcginnis at gmail.com  Tue Apr  2 13:54:30 2019
From: sean.mcginnis at gmail.com (Sean McGinnis)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 08:54:30 -0500
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
 proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
 Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
Message-ID: <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>

I like the intent. I'm a little concerned with the wording making it sound
like it will be the norm that discussing the review and approval of these
projects will be excluded from public and recorded meetings.

I understand that this enables it to happen if needed, but is there any way
to codify that this is for cases where those reviews fall under the first
two items mentioned to not be public?

Sean


On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 8:43 AM Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org> wrote:

> As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus and as
> the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the OpenStack board
> desires to do its part in helping the projects thrive and grow.  A key step
> in project advancement is the project confirmation by the Board.
> Confirmation will enable the Foundation to apply additional Foundation
> resources towards that project.  In support of this process, the board at
> its last meeting, approved the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As
> the Guidelines point out, many factors go into the board’s decisions.  To
> ensure that the board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as
> possible to the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the
> board will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as
> follows: (changed text in italics).
>
>
>
> 4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
> attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the
> candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, *and discuss the
> review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, *the Board of
> Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via
> remote teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the Board
> of Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request other
> information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate
> Law.
>
>
>
> If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels that
> there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this amendment
> provides a mechanism for such discussion.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alan Clark
>
>
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/attachments/20190402/a7e0127e/attachment.html>

From alanclark at openstack.org  Tue Apr  2 23:11:25 2019
From: alanclark at openstack.org (Alan Clark)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 17:11:25 -0600
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at
	next	week's	OpenStack board meeting to support
	Open	Infrastructure	project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <423268e6d25e483b85c9dc9977b67672@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <423268e6d25e483b85c9dc9977b67672@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
Message-ID: <009201d4e9a9$658b9ba0$30a2d2e0$@openstack.org>

The action from the last board meeting was for the motion to be made at next
week's meeting.    

 

Thanks,

AlanClark

 

From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com [mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2019 7:50 AM
To: AlanClark at openstack.org; foundation at lists.openstack.org;
foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's
OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation

 

Sounds like a good change.

Alan,

Do you propose we vote on it at Denver?

Thanks,
Arkady

 

From: Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org> >

Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 8:43 AM
To: foundation at lists.openstack.org <mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org> ;
foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
<mailto:foundation-board at lists.openstack.org> 
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's
OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation

 

[EXTERNAL EMAIL] 

As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus and as the
associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the OpenStack board desires
to do its part in helping the projects thrive and grow.  A key step in
project advancement is the project confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation
will enable the Foundation to apply additional Foundation resources towards
that project.  In support of this process, the board at its last meeting,
approved the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines
point out, many factors go into the board's decisions.  To ensure that the
board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to the needs
and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board will further
discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as follows: (changed text in
italics).

 

4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the
candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, and discuss the
review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, the Board of Directors
shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via remote
teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the Board of
Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request other
information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate
Law.

 

If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels that
there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this amendment
provides a mechanism for such discussion.

 

Thanks,

Alan Clark

 

 

[1]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmation
Guidelines

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190402/8db896f5/attachment-0001.html>

From Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com  Tue Apr  2 23:15:11 2019
From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com (Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 23:15:11 +0000
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at
	next	week's	OpenStack board meeting to support
	Open	Infrastructure	project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <009201d4e9a9$658b9ba0$30a2d2e0$@openstack.org>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <423268e6d25e483b85c9dc9977b67672@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
 <009201d4e9a9$658b9ba0$30a2d2e0$@openstack.org>
Message-ID: <07541ac9b5b847d381c6947a41906ffb@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>

Alan,
I feel this too rushed.
Any Bylaw changes typically run by legal in companies before the vote.
Do not see how we can achieve that in 1 week.
Thanks,
Arkady

From: Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 6:11 PM
To: Kanevsky, Arkady; foundation at lists.openstack.org; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
Subject: RE: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation


[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
The action from the last board meeting was for the motion to be made at next week's meeting.

Thanks,
AlanClark

From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com<mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com> [mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2019 7:50 AM
To: AlanClark at openstack.org<mailto:AlanClark at openstack.org>; foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation

Sounds like a good change.
Alan,
Do you propose we vote on it at Denver?
Thanks,
Arkady

From: Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org<mailto:alanclark at openstack.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 8:43 AM
To: foundation at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org>; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org<mailto:foundation-board at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation


[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus and as the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the OpenStack board desires to do its part in helping the projects thrive and grow.  A key step in project advancement is the project confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation will enable the Foundation to apply additional Foundation resources towards that project.  In support of this process, the board at its last meeting, approved the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines point out, many factors go into the board's decisions.  To ensure that the board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as follows: (changed text in italics).

4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, and discuss the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, the Board of Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via remote teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the Board of Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request other information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate Law.

If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.

Thanks,
Alan Clark


[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190402/49a3acfb/attachment.html>

From alanclark at openstack.org  Tue Apr  2 23:23:41 2019
From: alanclark at openstack.org (Alan Clark)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 17:23:41 -0600
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at
	next	week's	OpenStack board meeting to support
	Open	Infrastructure	project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <07541ac9b5b847d381c6947a41906ffb@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <423268e6d25e483b85c9dc9977b67672@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
 <009201d4e9a9$658b9ba0$30a2d2e0$@openstack.org>
 <07541ac9b5b847d381c6947a41906ffb@AUSX13MPS308.AMER.DELL.COM>
Message-ID: <00bd01d4e9ab$1c1a6bc0$544f4340$@openstack.org>

Sure.  This isn't an item that needs to be rushed. 

 

 

From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com [mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2019 5:15 PM
To: AlanClark at openstack.org; foundation at lists.openstack.org;
foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
Subject: RE: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's
OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation

 

Alan,

I feel this too rushed.

Any Bylaw changes typically run by legal in companies before the vote.

Do not see how we can achieve that in 1 week.

Thanks,

Arkady

 

From: Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org> >

Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 6:11 PM
To: Kanevsky, Arkady; foundation at lists.openstack.org
<mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org> ;
foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
<mailto:foundation-board at lists.openstack.org> 
Subject: RE: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's
OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation

 

[EXTERNAL EMAIL] 

The action from the last board meeting was for the motion to be made at next
week's meeting.    

 

Thanks,

AlanClark

 

From: Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com <mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com>
[mailto:Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2019 7:50 AM
To: AlanClark at openstack.org <mailto:AlanClark at openstack.org> ;
foundation at lists.openstack.org <mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org> ;
foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
<mailto:foundation-board at lists.openstack.org> 
Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's
OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation

 

Sounds like a good change.

Alan,

Do you propose we vote on it at Denver?

Thanks,
Arkady

 

From: Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org> >

Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 8:43 AM
To: foundation at lists.openstack.org <mailto:foundation at lists.openstack.org> ;
foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
<mailto:foundation-board at lists.openstack.org> 
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's
OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation

 

[EXTERNAL EMAIL] 

As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus and as the
associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the OpenStack board desires
to do its part in helping the projects thrive and grow.  A key step in
project advancement is the project confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation
will enable the Foundation to apply additional Foundation resources towards
that project.  In support of this process, the board at its last meeting,
approved the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines
point out, many factors go into the board's decisions.  To ensure that the
board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to the needs
and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board will further
discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as follows: (changed text in
italics).

 

4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the
candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, and discuss the
review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, the Board of Directors
shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via remote
teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the Board of
Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request other
information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate
Law.

 

If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels that
there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this amendment
provides a mechanism for such discussion.

 

Thanks,

Alan Clark

 

 

[1]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmation
Guidelines

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190402/dbdc3bf8/attachment-0001.html>

From alanclark at openstack.org  Tue Apr  2 23:46:12 2019
From: alanclark at openstack.org (Alan Clark)
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 17:46:12 -0600
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
	proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support
	Open Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00d601d4e9ae$41a87f50$c4f97df0$@openstack.org>

Thanks for the input Sean.  I’ll circle with Legal to see if the wording can be clarified.

-AlanClark

 

From: Sean McGinnis [mailto:sean.mcginnis at gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2019 7:55 AM
To: AlanClark at openstack.org
Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation Board] Bylaws change proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation

 

I like the intent. I'm a little concerned with the wording making it sound like it will be the norm that discussing the review and approval of these projects will be excluded from public and recorded meetings.

 

I understand that this enables it to happen if needed, but is there any way to codify that this is for cases where those reviews fall under the first two items mentioned to not be public?

 

Sean

 

 

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 8:43 AM Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org> > wrote:

As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus and as the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the OpenStack board desires to do its part in helping the projects thrive and grow.  A key step in project advancement is the project confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation will enable the Foundation to apply additional Foundation resources towards that project.  In support of this process, the board at its last meeting, approved the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines point out, many factors go into the board’s decisions.  To ensure that the board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as follows: (changed text in italics).

 

4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, and discuss the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, the Board of Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via remote teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the Board of Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request other information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate Law.

 

If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.

 

Thanks,

Alan Clark

 

 

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines

 

_______________________________________________
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/attachments/20190402/7e37bc56/attachment.html>

From mnaser at vexxhost.com  Thu Apr  4 20:03:02 2019
From: mnaser at vexxhost.com (Mohammed Naser)
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 16:03:02 -0400
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack TC feedback on Zuul for OIP
	Confirmation
Message-ID: <CAEs876gYmLuC96VaNA3s0=DR+LJ1oeHBd6nJjeT+XdSd4F_-QQ@mail.gmail.com>

Per the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[0], the OSF Board of
directors is soliciting feedback from representatives of existing
confirmed Open Infrastructure Projects (so far that's just OpenStack)
when evaluating the Zuul pilot project's upcoming application for OIP
confirmation. We reached out to the OpenStack community to get an idea
of what interactions have been experienced or observed relevant to
these guidelines, and compiled them in an Etherpad[1] for ease of
collaboration. The feedback is broken down by each of the five major
guideline headings along with a catch-all at the end. Here follows an
attempt to summarize what we've learned:

Zuul furthers the strategic focus of the OSF, helping open
infrastrucure projects ensure the highest possible levels of code
quality by applying the concept of project gating. It is responsible
in great part for the success of OpenStack and OpenDev, as well as
found useful by other pilot projects like Airship and StarlingX. It's
widely seen as a simplifying force for our continuous integration and
project infrastructure. Zuul itself makes heavy use of OpenStack-based
services and considers those a first-class supported feature.

The governance[2] for Zuul is fairly straightforward, perhaps
described in OpenStack terms as a team of consensus-seeking core
reviewers (the Zuul Maintainers) who elect a PTL (the Zuul Project
Lead) from within their ranks rather than relying on anyone who has
contributed a patch to do so. It is also somewhat analogous to how the
OpenStack TC elects its chair, though the Zuul Maintainers are a
self-selected group rather than being elected by other patch
submitters. Given that in OpenStack each PTL is basically always
already a core reviewer and a consensus choice of their peers (and
almost always the only candidate nominated), and that PTLs tend to
defer addition and removal of new core reviewers to consensus among
the existing cores, this seems like a model based in the reality of
team dynamics.

The Zuul project has not discarded the recommended practices from its
origins as a part of OpenStack, and indeed is itself responsible for
instating many of those practices within OpenStack. The OpenStack
community is particularly fond of Zuul's extensive, integrated
documentation[3] on which it heavily relies. While there are
instructions[4] on how to report suspected vulnerabilities and the
team is regularly publishing advisories[5][6][7], it was noted that
there is not yet a published document describing the vulnerability
management process followed so this is a potential area for
improvement.

Similarly, Zuul's fundamental collaboration model is also inherited
from its OpenStack roots (or you could say Zuul was responsible for
much of it while still a part of OpenStack). The members of the Zuul
community are happy to help users, including other Open Infrastrucure
Projects and OSF pilot projects, solve their problems even (or perhaps
especially) when it means Zuul itself needs to grow new features to do
so. There was one note that it might be nice to get a clearer picture
as to how Zuul relates or could relate to the projects in the
newly-formed CD Foundation[8].

As to active engagement, Zuul is remarked as having an obvious
diversity of developers and production users from many companies with
a rapidly growing ecosystem and presence at industry events like
AnsibleFest. The Zuul community has also been observed going to great
lengths in assisting new deployers of its software, many of whom are
notably operators of third-party CI for testing drivers and features
of various OpenStack subsystems. Even the software itself is
considered to be a tool of outreach, leaving its own inline review
comments for syntax errors in proposed configuration changes.

[0] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/openstack-tc-zuul-confirmation-feedback
[2] https://zuul-ci.org/docs/zuul/governance.html
[3] https://zuul-ci.org/docs/
[4] https://zuul-ci.org/docs/zuul/user/vulnerabilities.html
[5] http://lists.zuul-ci.org/pipermail/zuul-announce/2018-November/000027.html
[6] http://lists.zuul-ci.org/pipermail/zuul-announce/2019-January/000032.html
[7] http://lists.zuul-ci.org/pipermail/zuul-announce/2019-March/000035.html
[8] https://cd.foundation/

-- 
Mohammed Naser — vexxhost
-----------------------------------------------------
D. 514-316-8872
D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200
E. mnaser at vexxhost.com
W. http://vexxhost.com


From mnaser at vexxhost.com  Thu Apr  4 20:04:10 2019
From: mnaser at vexxhost.com (Mohammed Naser)
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 16:04:10 -0400
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] OpenStack TC feedback on Kata Containers for
	OIP Confirmation
Message-ID: <CAEs876i30Cey3L1Dc-y0Q+HhszAJcDqaWTow4xqiooPYJ34vQg@mail.gmail.com>

Per the OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[0], the OSF Board of
directors is soliciting feedback from representatives of existing
confirmed Open Infrastructure Projects (so far that's just OpenStack)
when evaluating the Kata Containers pilot project's upcoming
application for OIP confirmation. We reached out to the OpenStack
community to get an idea of what interactions have been experienced or
observed relevant to these guidelines, and compiled them in an
Etherpad[1] for ease of collaboration. The feedback is broken down by
each of the five major guideline headings along with a catch-all at
the end. Here follows an attempt to summarize what we've learned:

Kata Containers aids the OSF's strategic focus by bringing value to
those working with multi-tenant and similarly sensitive
container-oriented technologies. It has brought the OSF community new
inroads with Amazon/AWS technologists through its collaboration and
integration with their Firecracker project. Involvement with OpenStack
projects seems so far to have been limited to Zun[2], though Kata's
testing has indirectly helped improve the state of nested
virtualization in OpenStack. Opportunities for interaction with Magnum
and other related parts of OpenStack remain as of yet untapped, and it
was also suggested that use cases for leveraging Kata to further
isolate Zuul executor processes and job nodes merit future
exploration. Unfortunately, overall lack of OpenStack community
familiarity with Kata seems to indicate some failures at outreach,
possibly in both directions (including noted absence from PTGs).

The governance[3] established for Kata employs a relatively similar
model to that of OpenStack at the top level with their AC parallel to
the OpenStack TC, and the election process they've followed is similar
as well (though tuned for electors contributing through GitHub rather
than OpenDev). On recommended technical practices, they use a
vulnerability management process[4] inspired by OpenStack's, but
maintain their own public CI system[5] to test and report on proposed
pull requests for their software along with performing periodic
post-merge performance analyses. When it comes to open collaboration,
their reliance on proprietary tools like GitHub and Slack was called
out as a possible point of contention, however respondents from the
OpenStack community remarked that submitting contributions or
otherwise interacting with Kata maintainers was a pleasant/positive
experience and the community was genuinely helpful. They seem to be
actively engaged with potential users and projects they see as
relevant to their scope (notably Firecracker), and maintain a visible
presence at popular industry events like KubeCon.

[0] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/openstack-tc-kata-confirmation-feedback
[2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/004376.html
[3] https://github.com/kata-containers/community
[4] https://github.com/kata-containers/community/blob/master/VMT/VMT.md
[5] http://jenkins.katacontainers.io/


-- 
Mohammed Naser — vexxhost
-----------------------------------------------------
D. 514-316-8872
D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200
E. mnaser at vexxhost.com
W. http://vexxhost.com


From gr at ham.ie  Fri Apr  5 14:54:50 2019
From: gr at ham.ie (Graham Hayes)
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 15:54:50 +0100
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's
 OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
Message-ID: <bdbb4ebb-dd1f-ebb0-18df-38cb852dbdda@ham.ie>

On 02/04/2019 14:43, Alan Clark wrote:
<snip>
> 4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
> attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the
> candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, /and discuss
> the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, /the Board of
> Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via
> remote teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the
> Board of Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request
> other information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware
> Corporate Law.
>
>
>
> If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels
> that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this
> amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.
>
I am still not sure what could be required for an executive session that
is not covered by "sensitive personnel information" that would require
this.

Personally, for me, this looks like we are not abiding by our own ethos
of the Four Opens - I do understand if there is personel issues with a
potential project, we would want to have it discussed behind closed
doors, but everything else should be in the open. If the project
that is about to be included has large enough personnel issues that
they could cause issues for its inclusion in the foundation, there
is a very high chance that they are going to fail some of the
confirmation guidelines, and that *is* something the community
should have visiblity into.

Even from an optics perspective - the board deciding to include or
not include a project behind closed doors is not something that
is representitive of the OpenStack community, and not something
I think the community should be supporting.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190405/69c69fdb/attachment-0001.sig>

From amy at demarco.com  Fri Apr  5 19:37:05 2019
From: amy at demarco.com (Amy Marrich)
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 14:37:05 -0500
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Diversity] D&I WG Meeting Reminder
Message-ID: <CAFs83QpfjSruDswE8KLb1Od4SPJNvHJcXMM5JeRQ7-B_gyoTUw@mail.gmail.com>

The Diversity & Inclusion WG will hold it's next meeting Monday(4/8) at
17:00 UTC in the #openstack-diversity channel. The agenda can be found at
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/diversity-wg-agenda. Please feel free to
add any other topics you wish to discuss at the meeting.

Including the discuss list to invite potential new members!

Thanks,
Amy (spotz)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190405/dc265323/attachment.html>

From alanclark at openstack.org  Sun Apr  7 00:18:28 2019
From: alanclark at openstack.org (Alan Clark)
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 18:18:28 -0600
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Reminder for the OpenStack board meeting,
	April 8th 7am pacific
Message-ID: <009501d4ecd7$6d9a4ea0$48ceebe0$@openstack.org>

Reminder,  The OpenStack board will hold a board meeting on April 8th at 7am
pacific.

 

The main topics for the meeting are a 2 project confirmation previews.

 

Meeting date: April 8th 

Time: 7am pacific to 9am pacific

Location: https://zoom.us/j/9574980705 (
<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fj%2F9574980705&sa=D&us
t=1551725789504000&usg=AFQjCNFvenAoL6huE4M30sG0kMRtU9aUJw> map)

Agenda:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/8April2019BoardMeeting

Thanks,

AlanClark

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190406/e2872672/attachment.html>

From jonathan at openstack.org  Mon Apr  8 15:58:38 2019
From: jonathan at openstack.org (Jonathan Bryce)
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 10:58:38 -0500
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] April 8, 2019 Board Meeting
Message-ID: <D0ECD38C-C387-4EC7-BD7A-0D77CCD9A25D@openstack.org>

Hi everyone,

The OSF Board of Directors met today. The agenda was posted online[1]. The primary purpose of today’s meeting was confirmation review of two pilot projects: Kata Containers and Zuul.

Eric Ernst from the Kata Containers Architecture Committee presented about the project and covered the areas that the Board had approved as guidelines for confirmation[2]. After the presentation[3], the Board had a number of questions for the Kata Containers team. As the questions wrapped up, the Board decided to proceed with a vote on confirmation today and approved it as the first new top-level Open Infrastructure Project in the foundation. Congrats to the Kata Containers team and community!

Next, Monty Taylor presented the Zuul project for consideration[4]. Again, the presentation was followed by discussion and a number of questions around the project. In particular the Board spent a lot of time discussing some of the licensing considerations in Zuul as it integrates with other non-Apache licensed projects and code. Several people made proposals about how to handle the approval of the project to take this into account. In the end, everyone agreed to work that out offline and revisit the licensing and confirmation proposals at the next Board meeting.

Finally, Alan reviewed the state of updating the provision in the Bylaws around topics that are allowed to be discussed in Executive Session. There’s been a longer thread on the mailing list on this[5], and the Board will continue to review this with a potential vote at an upcoming Board meeting.

Thanks to the Kata and Zuul teams for putting together great presentations and taking the time to discuss their progress with the Board!

Jonathan


1. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/8April2019BoardMeeting
2. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines
3. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Vil7Px-KyjxrfjO4TT25hKRDb2O02_qmrn4RtFBq0d4/
4. https://zuul-ci.org/confirmation/
5. http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/2019-April/002740.html

From allison at lohutok.net  Mon Apr  8 17:20:46 2019
From: allison at lohutok.net (Allison Randal)
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 18:20:46 +0100
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
 proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
 Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <91341018-2d36-df49-70f6-7c60d5549e26@lohutok.net>

We talked about this in the board meeting today, and thought that
"Except as necessary" at the beginning of the sentence is sufficient for
the bylaws to express that open meetings are the norm, and executive
sessions are only for special limited circumstances. But, since our
process for the Gold and Platinum Member candidacy is to always schedule
an executive session, that might create an assumption that we will do
the same for project confirmation. We thought the best place to be
explicit that open meetings are the normal process for confirmation
review would be in the process section at the bottom of the project
confirmation guidelines:

https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines

I volunteered to make a first draft, so here is a bullet point, to add
just after the point "Representatives of the pilot project will attend a
discussion meeting with the Board..."

======
The discussion meeting will be an open meeting. The Board, the
Foundation staff, or the pilot project may optionally request an
executive session for part of the meeting, if some discussion topics
have special sensitivity for legal or privacy reasons.
======

The idea is that we'll refine the wording here on the mailing lists, and
then the Board will vote on the wording change to the confirmation
guidelines at the same Board meeting where we vote on the Bylaws wording
change.

Allison

On 4/2/19 2:54 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
> I like the intent. I'm a little concerned with the wording making it
> sound like it will be the norm that discussing the review and approval
> of these projects will be excluded from public and recorded meetings.
> 
> I understand that this enables it to happen if needed, but is there any
> way to codify that this is for cases where those reviews fall under the
> first two items mentioned to not be public?
> 
> Sean
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 8:43 AM Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org
> <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org>> wrote:
> 
>     As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus
>     and as the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the
>     OpenStack board desires to do its part in helping the projects
>     thrive and grow.  A key step in project advancement is the project
>     confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation will enable the Foundation
>     to apply additional Foundation resources towards that project.  In
>     support of this process, the board at its last meeting, approved the
>     OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines point
>     out, many factors go into the board’s decisions.  To ensure that the
>     board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to
>     the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board
>     will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as
>     follows: (changed text in italics).____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
>     attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss
>     the candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, /and
>     discuss the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects,
>     /the Board of Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its
>     meetings by Members via remote teleconference or other electronic
>     means, and (ii) publish the Board of Directors minutes and make
>     available to any Member on request other information and records of
>     the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate Law.____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director
>     feels that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected
>     this amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     Thanks,____
> 
>     Alan Clark____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     [1]
>     https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfirmationGuidelines____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> 


From alanclark at openstack.org  Tue Apr  9 22:25:28 2019
From: alanclark at openstack.org (Alan Clark)
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 16:25:28 -0600
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
	proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support
	Open Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <91341018-2d36-df49-70f6-7c60d5549e26@lohutok.net>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <91341018-2d36-df49-70f6-7c60d5549e26@lohutok.net>
Message-ID: <005d01d4ef23$23872420$6a956c60$@openstack.org>

Allison,  Thank you for leading this task.  I would like to suggest an additional thought to include in the wording.

That the official voting will be performed within the open meetings.  The same is done for Gold and Platinum member discussions today.

Regards,
AlanClark

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Allison Randal [mailto:allison at lohutok.net]
>Sent: Monday, April 08, 2019 11:21 AM
>To: Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmail.com>
>Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
>Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
>proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
>Infrastructure project confirmation
>
>We talked about this in the board meeting today, and thought that "Except as
>necessary" at the beginning of the sentence is sufficient for the bylaws to express
>that open meetings are the norm, and executive sessions are only for special
>limited circumstances. But, since our process for the Gold and Platinum Member
>candidacy is to always schedule an executive session, that might create an
>assumption that we will do the same for project confirmation. We thought the
>best place to be explicit that open meetings are the normal process for
>confirmation review would be in the process section at the bottom of the project
>confirmation guidelines:
>
>https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Governance/Foundation/OSFProje
>ctConfirmationGuidelines
>
>I volunteered to make a first draft, so here is a bullet point, to add just after the
>point "Representatives of the pilot project will attend a discussion meeting with
>the Board..."
>
>======
>The discussion meeting will be an open meeting. The Board, the Foundation staff,
>or the pilot project may optionally request an executive session for part of the
>meeting, if some discussion topics have special sensitivity for legal or privacy
>reasons.
>======
>
>The idea is that we'll refine the wording here on the mailing lists, and then the
>Board will vote on the wording change to the confirmation guidelines at the same
>Board meeting where we vote on the Bylaws wording change.
>
>Allison
>
>On 4/2/19 2:54 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>> I like the intent. I'm a little concerned with the wording making it
>> sound like it will be the norm that discussing the review and approval
>> of these projects will be excluded from public and recorded meetings.
>>
>> I understand that this enables it to happen if needed, but is there
>> any way to codify that this is for cases where those reviews fall
>> under the first two items mentioned to not be public?
>>
>> Sean
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 8:43 AM Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org
>> <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org>> wrote:
>>
>>     As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus
>>     and as the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the
>>     OpenStack board desires to do its part in helping the projects
>>     thrive and grow.  A key step in project advancement is the project
>>     confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation will enable the Foundation
>>     to apply additional Foundation resources towards that project.  In
>>     support of this process, the board at its last meeting, approved the
>>     OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines point
>>     out, many factors go into the board’s decisions.  To ensure that the
>>     board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to
>>     the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board
>>     will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as
>>     follows: (changed text in italics).____
>>
>>     __ __
>>
>>     4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
>>     attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss
>>     the candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, /and
>>     discuss the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects,
>>     /the Board of Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its
>>     meetings by Members via remote teleconference or other electronic
>>     means, and (ii) publish the Board of Directors minutes and make
>>     available to any Member on request other information and records of
>>     the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate Law.____
>>
>>     __ __
>>
>>     If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director
>>     feels that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected
>>     this amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.____
>>
>>     __ __
>>
>>     Thanks,____
>>
>>     Alan Clark____
>>
>>     __ __
>>
>>     __ __
>>
>>     [1]
>>
>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfir
>> mationGuidelines____
>>
>>     __ __
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Foundation mailing list
>Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation



From amy at demarco.com  Sun Apr 21 19:16:45 2019
From: amy at demarco.com (Amy Marrich)
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 14:16:45 -0500
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Diversity] D&I WG Meeting Reminder -
	tomorrow
Message-ID: <CAFs83Qq4jqXD=uH70gtOWR54_jJCnvOUQT2V31bFn2i9S-XSag@mail.gmail.com>

The Diversity & Inclusion WG will hold it's next meeting this Monday(4/22)
at 17:00 UTC in the #openstack-diversity channel. The agenda can be found
at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/diversity-wg-agenda. Please feel free
to add any other topics you wish to discuss at the meeting.

Including the discuss list to invite potential new members!

Thanks,
Amy (spotz)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190421/5d402362/attachment.html>

From amy at demarco.com  Sun Apr 21 22:48:04 2019
From: amy at demarco.com (Amy Marrich)
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 17:48:04 -0500
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Diversity Events
Message-ID: <CAFs83Qqa52keFXZNOtpig23cDJafora44W3j=cKWFQjye0q=8A@mail.gmail.com>

Summit is a week away and I wanted to point out a few Diversity related
sessions and events taking place.

Thanks,

Amy (spotz)

Monday:
12:20-1:40 - Speed Mentoring Lunch sponsored by Intel - RSVP required
https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23757/rsvp-required-speed-mentoring-lunch-sponsored-by-intel

Tuesday:
12:20-1:40 - Diversity Networking Lunch sponsored by IBM - RSVP required
https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23756/rsvp-required-diversity-networking-lunch-sponsored-by-ibm
1:40-2:20 - The Results are in for the D&I Survey. This is a first review
of the data collected.
https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23692/the-results-are-in-for-the-d-and-i-survey

Wednesday:
10:50-11:30 - Diversity WG BoF - looking for help with the Mentoring Program
https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23745/diversity-working-group-bof
11:40-12:20 - Diversity and Inclusion  WG
https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23746/diversity-and-inclusion-wg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190421/bb9b3139/attachment.html>

From allison at lohutok.net  Mon Apr 22 14:18:56 2019
From: allison at lohutok.net (Allison Randal)
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 10:18:56 -0400
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
 proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
 Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <005d01d4ef23$23872420$6a956c60$@openstack.org>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <91341018-2d36-df49-70f6-7c60d5549e26@lohutok.net>
 <005d01d4ef23$23872420$6a956c60$@openstack.org>
Message-ID: <f934a511-6644-ebdc-4bc9-dc405692b318@lohutok.net>

Hi Alan,

That sounds like a good addition. To keep the wording simple, I'll
suggest changing the last line of the process section to read:

==========
The Board will review the project's application and vote whether to
confirm it in the open meeting.
==========

Allison

On 4/9/19 6:25 PM, Alan Clark wrote:
> Allison,  Thank you for leading this task.  I would like to suggest an additional thought to include in the wording.
> 
> That the official voting will be performed within the open meetings.  The same is done for Gold and Platinum member discussions today.
> 
> Regards,
> AlanClark
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Allison Randal [mailto:allison at lohutok.net]
>> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2019 11:21 AM
>> To: Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmail.com>
>> Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
>> proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
>> Infrastructure project confirmation
>>
>> We talked about this in the board meeting today, and thought that "Except as
>> necessary" at the beginning of the sentence is sufficient for the bylaws to express
>> that open meetings are the norm, and executive sessions are only for special
>> limited circumstances. But, since our process for the Gold and Platinum Member
>> candidacy is to always schedule an executive session, that might create an
>> assumption that we will do the same for project confirmation. We thought the
>> best place to be explicit that open meetings are the normal process for
>> confirmation review would be in the process section at the bottom of the project
>> confirmation guidelines:
>>
>> https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Governance/Foundation/OSFProje
>> ctConfirmationGuidelines
>>
>> I volunteered to make a first draft, so here is a bullet point, to add just after the
>> point "Representatives of the pilot project will attend a discussion meeting with
>> the Board..."
>>
>> ======
>> The discussion meeting will be an open meeting. The Board, the Foundation staff,
>> or the pilot project may optionally request an executive session for part of the
>> meeting, if some discussion topics have special sensitivity for legal or privacy
>> reasons.
>> ======
>>
>> The idea is that we'll refine the wording here on the mailing lists, and then the
>> Board will vote on the wording change to the confirmation guidelines at the same
>> Board meeting where we vote on the Bylaws wording change.
>>
>> Allison
>>
>> On 4/2/19 2:54 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>>> I like the intent. I'm a little concerned with the wording making it
>>> sound like it will be the norm that discussing the review and approval
>>> of these projects will be excluded from public and recorded meetings.
>>>
>>> I understand that this enables it to happen if needed, but is there
>>> any way to codify that this is for cases where those reviews fall
>>> under the first two items mentioned to not be public?
>>>
>>> Sean
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 8:43 AM Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org
>>> <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus
>>>     and as the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the
>>>     OpenStack board desires to do its part in helping the projects
>>>     thrive and grow.  A key step in project advancement is the project
>>>     confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation will enable the Foundation
>>>     to apply additional Foundation resources towards that project.  In
>>>     support of this process, the board at its last meeting, approved the
>>>     OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines point
>>>     out, many factors go into the board’s decisions.  To ensure that the
>>>     board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to
>>>     the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board
>>>     will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as
>>>     follows: (changed text in italics).____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
>>>     attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss
>>>     the candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, /and
>>>     discuss the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects,
>>>     /the Board of Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its
>>>     meetings by Members via remote teleconference or other electronic
>>>     means, and (ii) publish the Board of Directors minutes and make
>>>     available to any Member on request other information and records of
>>>     the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate Law.____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director
>>>     feels that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected
>>>     this amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     Thanks,____
>>>
>>>     Alan Clark____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     [1]
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConfir
>>> mationGuidelines____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> 


From mark.radcliffe at dlapiper.com  Mon Apr 22 16:17:55 2019
From: mark.radcliffe at dlapiper.com (Radcliffe, Mark)
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:17:55 +0000
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
 proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
 Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <f934a511-6644-ebdc-4bc9-dc405692b318@lohutok.net>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <91341018-2d36-df49-70f6-7c60d5549e26@lohutok.net>
 <005d01d4ef23$23872420$6a956c60$@openstack.org>
 <f934a511-6644-ebdc-4bc9-dc405692b318@lohutok.net>
Message-ID: <E682AA2FC88ADD4589420BFC6BE3A921629748AC@SANDMBX01v.piper.root.local>

I think that this approach is fine if included in the process section.
-----Original Message-----
From: Allison Randal <allison at lohutok.net> 
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 7:19 AM
To: AlanClark at openstack.org; 'Sean McGinnis' <sean.mcginnis at gmail.com>
Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation Board] [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation

[EXTERNAL]

Hi Alan,

That sounds like a good addition. To keep the wording simple, I'll suggest changing the last line of the process section to read:

==========
The Board will review the project's application and vote whether to confirm it in the open meeting.
==========

Allison

On 4/9/19 6:25 PM, Alan Clark wrote:
> Allison,  Thank you for leading this task.  I would like to suggest an additional thought to include in the wording.
> 
> That the official voting will be performed within the open meetings.  The same is done for Gold and Platinum member discussions today.
> 
> Regards,
> AlanClark
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Allison Randal [mailto:allison at lohutok.net]
>> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2019 11:21 AM
>> To: Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmail.com>
>> Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org; 
>> foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change 
>> proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open 
>> Infrastructure project confirmation
>>
>> We talked about this in the board meeting today, and thought that 
>> "Except as necessary" at the beginning of the sentence is sufficient 
>> for the bylaws to express that open meetings are the norm, and 
>> executive sessions are only for special limited circumstances. But, 
>> since our process for the Gold and Platinum Member candidacy is to 
>> always schedule an executive session, that might create an assumption 
>> that we will do the same for project confirmation. We thought the 
>> best place to be explicit that open meetings are the normal process 
>> for confirmation review would be in the process section at the bottom of the project confirmation guidelines:
>>
>> https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Governance/Foundation/OS
>> FProje
>> ctConfirmationGuidelines
>>
>> I volunteered to make a first draft, so here is a bullet point, to 
>> add just after the point "Representatives of the pilot project will 
>> attend a discussion meeting with the Board..."
>>
>> ======
>> The discussion meeting will be an open meeting. The Board, the 
>> Foundation staff, or the pilot project may optionally request an 
>> executive session for part of the meeting, if some discussion topics 
>> have special sensitivity for legal or privacy reasons.
>> ======
>>
>> The idea is that we'll refine the wording here on the mailing lists, 
>> and then the Board will vote on the wording change to the 
>> confirmation guidelines at the same Board meeting where we vote on the Bylaws wording change.
>>
>> Allison
>>
>> On 4/2/19 2:54 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>>> I like the intent. I'm a little concerned with the wording making it 
>>> sound like it will be the norm that discussing the review and 
>>> approval of these projects will be excluded from public and recorded meetings.
>>>
>>> I understand that this enables it to happen if needed, but is there 
>>> any way to codify that this is for cases where those reviews fall 
>>> under the first two items mentioned to not be public?
>>>
>>> Sean
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 8:43 AM Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org 
>>> <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus
>>>     and as the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the
>>>     OpenStack board desires to do its part in helping the projects
>>>     thrive and grow.  A key step in project advancement is the project
>>>     confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation will enable the Foundation
>>>     to apply additional Foundation resources towards that project.  In
>>>     support of this process, the board at its last meeting, approved the
>>>     OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines point
>>>     out, many factors go into the board’s decisions.  To ensure that the
>>>     board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to
>>>     the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board
>>>     will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as
>>>     follows: (changed text in italics).____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
>>>     attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss
>>>     the candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, /and
>>>     discuss the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects,
>>>     /the Board of Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its
>>>     meetings by Members via remote teleconference or other electronic
>>>     means, and (ii) publish the Board of Directors minutes and make
>>>     available to any Member on request other information and records of
>>>     the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate Law.____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director
>>>     feels that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected
>>>     this amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     Thanks,____
>>>
>>>     Alan Clark____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     [1]
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConf
>>> ir
>>> mationGuidelines____
>>>
>>>     __ __
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
> 

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

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.

From clemens.hardewig at crandale.de  Mon Apr 22 16:50:51 2019
From: clemens.hardewig at crandale.de (=?utf-8?Q?Clemens_Hardewig?=)
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:50:51 +0000
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
 proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
 Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <E682AA2FC88ADD4589420BFC6BE3A921629748AC@SANDMBX01v.piper.root.local>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <91341018-2d36-df49-70f6-7c60d5549e26@lohutok.net>
 <005d01d4ef23$23872420$6a956c60$@openstack.org>
 <f934a511-6644-ebdc-4bc9-dc405692b318@lohutok.net>
 <E682AA2FC88ADD4589420BFC6BE3A921629748AC@SANDMBX01v.piper.root.local>
Message-ID: <kcis.FDC81E23DBF34E9AB80B190EE8AC14A4@kopano.zuhause.xx>

All, 

Very good proposal, thanks!

Br c

Von meinem iPhone gesendet

> Am 22.04.2019 um 18:19 schrieb Radcliffe, Mark <mark.radcliffe at dlapiper.com>:
> 
> I think that this approach is fine if included in the process section.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Allison Randal <allison at lohutok.net> 
> Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 7:19 AM
> To: AlanClark at openstack.org; 'Sean McGinnis' <sean.mcginnis at gmail.com>
> Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [Foundation Board] [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation
> 
> [EXTERNAL]
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> That sounds like a good addition. To keep the wording simple, I'll suggest changing the last line of the process section to read:
> 
> ==========
> The Board will review the project's application and vote whether to confirm it in the open meeting.
> ==========
> 
> Allison
> 
>> On 4/9/19 6:25 PM, Alan Clark wrote:
>> Allison,  Thank you for leading this task.  I would like to suggest an additional thought to include in the wording.
>> 
>> That the official voting will be performed within the open meetings.  The same is done for Gold and Platinum member discussions today.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> AlanClark
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Allison Randal [mailto:allison at lohutok.net]
>>> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2019 11:21 AM
>>> To: Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org; 
>>> foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change 
>>> proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open 
>>> Infrastructure project confirmation
>>> 
>>> We talked about this in the board meeting today, and thought that 
>>> "Except as necessary" at the beginning of the sentence is sufficient 
>>> for the bylaws to express that open meetings are the norm, and 
>>> executive sessions are only for special limited circumstances. But, 
>>> since our process for the Gold and Platinum Member candidacy is to 
>>> always schedule an executive session, that might create an assumption 
>>> that we will do the same for project confirmation. We thought the 
>>> best place to be explicit that open meetings are the normal process 
>>> for confirmation review would be in the process section at the bottom of the project confirmation guidelines:
>>> 
>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Governance/Foundation/OS
>>> FProje
>>> ctConfirmationGuidelines
>>> 
>>> I volunteered to make a first draft, so here is a bullet point, to 
>>> add just after the point "Representatives of the pilot project will 
>>> attend a discussion meeting with the Board..."
>>> 
>>> ======
>>> The discussion meeting will be an open meeting. The Board, the 
>>> Foundation staff, or the pilot project may optionally request an 
>>> executive session for part of the meeting, if some discussion topics 
>>> have special sensitivity for legal or privacy reasons.
>>> ======
>>> 
>>> The idea is that we'll refine the wording here on the mailing lists, 
>>> and then the Board will vote on the wording change to the 
>>> confirmation guidelines at the same Board meeting where we vote on the Bylaws wording change.
>>> 
>>> Allison
>>> 
>>>> On 4/2/19 2:54 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>>>> I like the intent. I'm a little concerned with the wording making it 
>>>> sound like it will be the norm that discussing the review and 
>>>> approval of these projects will be excluded from public and recorded meetings.
>>>> 
>>>> I understand that this enables it to happen if needed, but is there 
>>>> any way to codify that this is for cases where those reviews fall 
>>>> under the first two items mentioned to not be public?
>>>> 
>>>> Sean
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 8:43 AM Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org 
>>>> <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>    As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus
>>>>    and as the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the
>>>>    OpenStack board desires to do its part in helping the projects
>>>>    thrive and grow.  A key step in project advancement is the project
>>>>    confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation will enable the Foundation
>>>>    to apply additional Foundation resources towards that project.  In
>>>>    support of this process, the board at its last meeting, approved the
>>>>    OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines point
>>>>    out, many factors go into the board’s decisions.  To ensure that the
>>>>    board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to
>>>>    the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board
>>>>    will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as
>>>>    follows: (changed text in italics).____
>>>> 
>>>>    __ __
>>>> 
>>>>    4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
>>>>    attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss
>>>>    the candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, /and
>>>>    discuss the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects,
>>>>    /the Board of Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its
>>>>    meetings by Members via remote teleconference or other electronic
>>>>    means, and (ii) publish the Board of Directors minutes and make
>>>>    available to any Member on request other information and records of
>>>>    the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate Law.____
>>>> 
>>>>    __ __
>>>> 
>>>>    If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director
>>>>    feels that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected
>>>>    this amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.____
>>>> 
>>>>    __ __
>>>> 
>>>>    Thanks,____
>>>> 
>>>>    Alan Clark____
>>>> 
>>>>    __ __
>>>> 
>>>>    __ __
>>>> 
>>>>    [1]
>>>> 
>>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConf
>>>> ir
>>>> mationGuidelines____
>>>> 
>>>>    __ __
>>>> 
>>>>    _______________________________________________
>>>>    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
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation-board mailing list
> Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
> 
> 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 ACLARK at suse.com  Mon Apr 22 17:38:49 2019
From: ACLARK at suse.com (Alan Clark)
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 17:38:49 +0000
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
 proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
 Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <f934a511-6644-ebdc-4bc9-dc405692b318@lohutok.net>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <CALvgmaTfEjscvMmDJBzZn6atM7MHTR5jRsPUJHowBt+ofi4T1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <91341018-2d36-df49-70f6-7c60d5549e26@lohutok.net>
 <005d01d4ef23$23872420$6a956c60$@openstack.org>
 <f934a511-6644-ebdc-4bc9-dc405692b318@lohutok.net>
Message-ID: <MWHPR18MB1472B03AE7091CB8C95EF47CB3220@MWHPR18MB1472.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>

That works!
AlanClark 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Allison Randal [mailto:allison at lohutok.net]
>Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 8:19 AM
>To: 'Sean McGinnis' <sean.mcginnis at gmail.com>; AlanClark at openstack.org
>Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
>Subject: Re: [Foundation Board] [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change
>proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
>Infrastructure project confirmation
>
>Hi Alan,
>
>That sounds like a good addition. To keep the wording simple, I'll suggest
>changing the last line of the process section to read:
>
>==========
>The Board will review the project's application and vote whether to confirm it in
>the open meeting.
>==========
>
>Allison
>
>On 4/9/19 6:25 PM, Alan Clark wrote:
>> Allison,  Thank you for leading this task.  I would like to suggest an additional
>thought to include in the wording.
>>
>> That the official voting will be performed within the open meetings.  The same
>is done for Gold and Platinum member discussions today.
>>
>> Regards,
>> AlanClark
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Allison Randal [mailto:allison at lohutok.net]
>>> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2019 11:21 AM
>>> To: Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org;
>>> foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
>>> proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
>>> Infrastructure project confirmation
>>>
>>> We talked about this in the board meeting today, and thought that
>>> "Except as necessary" at the beginning of the sentence is sufficient
>>> for the bylaws to express that open meetings are the norm, and
>>> executive sessions are only for special limited circumstances. But,
>>> since our process for the Gold and Platinum Member candidacy is to
>>> always schedule an executive session, that might create an assumption
>>> that we will do the same for project confirmation. We thought the
>>> best place to be explicit that open meetings are the normal process
>>> for confirmation review would be in the process section at the bottom of the
>project confirmation guidelines:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Governance/Foundation/OS
>>> FProje
>>> ctConfirmationGuidelines
>>>
>>> I volunteered to make a first draft, so here is a bullet point, to
>>> add just after the point "Representatives of the pilot project will
>>> attend a discussion meeting with the Board..."
>>>
>>> ======
>>> The discussion meeting will be an open meeting. The Board, the
>>> Foundation staff, or the pilot project may optionally request an
>>> executive session for part of the meeting, if some discussion topics
>>> have special sensitivity for legal or privacy reasons.
>>> ======
>>>
>>> The idea is that we'll refine the wording here on the mailing lists,
>>> and then the Board will vote on the wording change to the
>>> confirmation guidelines at the same Board meeting where we vote on the
>Bylaws wording change.
>>>
>>> Allison
>>>
>>> On 4/2/19 2:54 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>>>> I like the intent. I'm a little concerned with the wording making it
>>>> sound like it will be the norm that discussing the review and
>>>> approval of these projects will be excluded from public and recorded
>meetings.
>>>>
>>>> I understand that this enables it to happen if needed, but is there
>>>> any way to codify that this is for cases where those reviews fall
>>>> under the first two items mentioned to not be public?
>>>>
>>>> Sean
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 8:43 AM Alan Clark <alanclark at openstack.org
>>>> <mailto:alanclark at openstack.org>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>     As the OpenStack Foundation embraces new areas of strategic focus
>>>>     and as the associated Open Infrastructure projects mature, the
>>>>     OpenStack board desires to do its part in helping the projects
>>>>     thrive and grow.  A key step in project advancement is the project
>>>>     confirmation by the Board.  Confirmation will enable the Foundation
>>>>     to apply additional Foundation resources towards that project.  In
>>>>     support of this process, the board at its last meeting, approved the
>>>>     OSF Project Confirmation Guidelines[1].  As the Guidelines point
>>>>     out, many factors go into the board’s decisions.  To ensure that the
>>>>     board has the mechanisms needed to be as sensitive as possible to
>>>>     the needs and feelings for those invested in the projects, the board
>>>>     will further discuss a motion to amend bylaws section 4.16 as
>>>>     follows: (changed text in italics).____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
>>>>     attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss
>>>>     the candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, /and
>>>>     discuss the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects,
>>>>     /the Board of Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its
>>>>     meetings by Members via remote teleconference or other electronic
>>>>     means, and (ii) publish the Board of Directors minutes and make
>>>>     available to any Member on request other information and records of
>>>>     the Foundation as required by Delaware Corporate Law.____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director
>>>>     feels that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected
>>>>     this amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     Thanks,____
>>>>
>>>>     Alan Clark____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     [1]
>>>>
>>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/OSFProjectConf
>>>> ir
>>>> mationGuidelines____
>>>>
>>>>     __ __
>>>>
>>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>>     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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Foundation-board mailing list
>Foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board

From amy at demarco.com  Mon Apr 22 18:36:23 2019
From: amy at demarco.com (Amy Marrich)
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 13:36:23 -0500
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Diversity Events - Updated
In-Reply-To: <CAFs83Qqa52keFXZNOtpig23cDJafora44W3j=cKWFQjye0q=8A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFs83Qqa52keFXZNOtpig23cDJafora44W3j=cKWFQjye0q=8A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAFs83Qq_MpND=Ld_HwvsvReNbp4Qj=gidv0MqUL3iW2Kn6NVKw@mail.gmail.com>

I noticed that one event on Tuesday (Chasing Grace Screening) was a
conflict with the Survey Results so please note the following updated
information:

Tuesday:
1:40-2:20 - Chasing Grace Episode 2 screening
https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23602/chasing-grace-episode-2-screening-progress-and-the-power-of-community

Wednesday:
2:30 - 3:10 - The Results are in for the D&I Survey. This is a first review
of the data collected.
https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23692/the-results-are-in-for-the-d-and-i-survey

I would also like to add if anyone would like to touch base at summit about
anything Diversity related or otherwise, please feel free to hit me up via
email, IRC (spotz), or Twitter (spotzz_) to schedule time.

Thanks,

Amy (spotz)


On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 5:48 PM Amy Marrich <amy at demarco.com> wrote:

> Summit is a week away and I wanted to point out a few Diversity related
> sessions and events taking place.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Amy (spotz)
>
> Monday:
> 12:20-1:40 - Speed Mentoring Lunch sponsored by Intel - RSVP required
>
> https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23757/rsvp-required-speed-mentoring-lunch-sponsored-by-intel
>
> Tuesday:
> 12:20-1:40 - Diversity Networking Lunch sponsored by IBM - RSVP required
>
> https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23756/rsvp-required-diversity-networking-lunch-sponsored-by-ibm
> 1:40-2:20 - The Results are in for the D&I Survey. This is a first review
> of the data collected.
>
> https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23692/the-results-are-in-for-the-d-and-i-survey
>
> Wednesday:
> 10:50-11:30 - Diversity WG BoF - looking for help with the Mentoring
> Program
>
> https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23745/diversity-working-group-bof
> 11:40-12:20 - Diversity and Inclusion  WG
>
> https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23746/diversity-and-inclusion-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190422/2ee342a9/attachment-0001.html>

From markmc at redhat.com  Sun Apr 28 20:45:43 2019
From: markmc at redhat.com (Mark McLoughlin)
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 21:45:43 +0100
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's
 OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <bdbb4ebb-dd1f-ebb0-18df-38cb852dbdda@ham.ie>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <bdbb4ebb-dd1f-ebb0-18df-38cb852dbdda@ham.ie>
Message-ID: <CANDZdqadpuQB-h72sch6XHK0arRv9xPJ1fWnMzUmFo4i=nE9tA@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 4:02 PM Graham Hayes <gr at ham.ie> wrote:

> On 02/04/2019 14:43, Alan Clark wrote:
> <snip>
> > 4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
> > attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the
> > candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, /and discuss
> > the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, /the Board of
> > Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via
> > remote teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the
> > Board of Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request
> > other information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware
> > Corporate Law.
> >
> >
> >
> > If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels
> > that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this
> > amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.
> >
> I am still not sure what could be required for an executive session that
> is not covered by "sensitive personnel information" that would require
> this.
>
> Personally, for me, this looks like we are not abiding by our own ethos
> of the Four Opens - I do understand if there is personel issues with a
> potential project, we would want to have it discussed behind closed
> doors, but everything else should be in the open. If the project
> that is about to be included has large enough personnel issues that
> they could cause issues for its inclusion in the foundation, there
> is a very high chance that they are going to fail some of the
> confirmation guidelines, and that *is* something the community
> should have visiblity into.
>
> Even from an optics perspective - the board deciding to include or
> not include a project behind closed doors is not something that
> is representitive of the OpenStack community, and not something
> I think the community should be supporting.
>

I know there's some lingering concern about this, and I'm generally against
matters of wider community interest being discussed in executive session,
but I'm comfortable about this proposal because:

a) There is no default expectation of having an executive session before
every confirmation vote - indeed, we've had two now with no executive
session

b) Anyone who does request an executive session will have to justify to the
board why the topic is so sensitive that it requires executive session

c) Confirming a project means the OSF making a long-term commitment to that
project - I'd much rather there to be some mechanism for people to raise
sensitive concerns, rather than risk projects being confirmed without those
concerns ever getting raised

d) The confirmation vote will happen in public - if there is any
controversy, I expect it would be apparent from the voting, and I expect
board members would feel compelled to give some explanation for their
voting rather than leave the community completely in the dark

Hope that helps,
Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190428/c1b5ffb7/attachment.html>

From rv6848 at att.com  Tue Apr 30 13:05:34 2019
From: rv6848 at att.com (VAN WYK, RYAN L)
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 13:05:34 +0000
Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] [Foundation Board] Bylaws change
 proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open
 Infrastructure project confirmation
In-Reply-To: <CANDZdqadpuQB-h72sch6XHK0arRv9xPJ1fWnMzUmFo4i=nE9tA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00a501d4e95a$05623e40$1026bac0$@openstack.org>
 <bdbb4ebb-dd1f-ebb0-18df-38cb852dbdda@ham.ie>
 <CANDZdqadpuQB-h72sch6XHK0arRv9xPJ1fWnMzUmFo4i=nE9tA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9B4615ED4FEDC74EA1FAF8B11F578BFA5567723C@MOSTLS1MSGUSREG.ITServices.sbc.com>

Mark I agree with your comments 100%.

Thanks,

Ryan van Wyk
Assistant Vice President (AVP) – Member of Technical Staff
Network Cloud & Infrastructure, Network Cloud Software Engineering


From: Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2019 3:46 PM
To: Graham Hayes <gr at ham.ie>
Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org; foundation-board at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation Board] [OpenStack Foundation] Bylaws change proposed at next week's OpenStack board meeting to support Open Infrastructure project confirmation



On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 4:02 PM Graham Hayes <gr at ham.ie<mailto:gr at ham.ie>> wrote:
On 02/04/2019 14:43, Alan Clark wrote:
<snip>
> 4.16 Open Meetings and Records.  Except as necessary to protect
> attorney-client privilege, sensitive personnel information, discuss the
> candidacy of potential Gold Member and Platinum Members, /and discuss
> the review and approval of Open Infrastructure Projects, /the Board of
> Directors shall: (i) permit observation of its meetings by Members via
> remote teleconference or other electronic means, and (ii) publish the
> Board of Directors minutes and make available to any Member on request
> other information and records of the Foundation as required by Delaware
> Corporate Law.
>
>
>
> If, during confirmation discussions, a project lead or Director feels
> that there is sensitive information that needs to be protected this
> amendment provides a mechanism for such discussion.
>
I am still not sure what could be required for an executive session that
is not covered by "sensitive personnel information" that would require
this.

Personally, for me, this looks like we are not abiding by our own ethos
of the Four Opens - I do understand if there is personel issues with a
potential project, we would want to have it discussed behind closed
doors, but everything else should be in the open. If the project
that is about to be included has large enough personnel issues that
they could cause issues for its inclusion in the foundation, there
is a very high chance that they are going to fail some of the
confirmation guidelines, and that *is* something the community
should have visiblity into.

Even from an optics perspective - the board deciding to include or
not include a project behind closed doors is not something that
is representitive of the OpenStack community, and not something
I think the community should be supporting.

I know there's some lingering concern about this, and I'm generally against matters of wider community interest being discussed in executive session, but I'm comfortable about this proposal because:

a) There is no default expectation of having an executive session before every confirmation vote - indeed, we've had two now with no executive session

b) Anyone who does request an executive session will have to justify to the board why the topic is so sensitive that it requires executive session

c) Confirming a project means the OSF making a long-term commitment to that project - I'd much rather there to be some mechanism for people to raise sensitive concerns, rather than risk projects being confirmed without those concerns ever getting raised

d) The confirmation vote will happen in public - if there is any controversy, I expect it would be apparent from the voting, and I expect board members would feel compelled to give some explanation for their voting rather than leave the community completely in the dark

Hope that helps,
Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20190430/9bdd130a/attachment.html>