Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 9 Current »

Date


Attendees

Goals

Discussion items

TimeItemWhoNotes
1minSelect Scribe for meetinggroupTosha Ellison
10 minOther FINOS Governance itemsgroup

Nicholas Kolba met with Aaron Williamson and Rob Underwood (Deactivated) re: governance.  Here were the minutes from that meeting: 

  • Minutes Embargo
    • 2 days
    • Only available to WG members (Confluence group) then made public
      • Automatic process if possible, otherwise admin access for committee/PMC leads
    • ACTION: Aaron to raise INT for INFRA
  • Standards Ratification
    • If not, amend the POP to set out explicit voting rules for standards
    • ACTION: Aaron to attend next FDC3 PMC meeting
    • Proposal:
      • Notice-and-comment period
      • WG decides whether to revise
      • N&C for any revisions
      • Ratification by WG and PMC
    • ACTION:
      • Aaron to review PGP & POP re: revising POP
      • Aaron to draft revision to POP
    • Process not spelled out in POP
    • Generic voting rules sufficient, plus ratification by PMC?
    • Role of PMC & other WGs in approval of WG-ratified standards
    • Parking lot: communications re: why we're different from a standards development organization
  • FDC3 Badging
    • Prevent bad-faith/inconsistent use
    • Foundation needs to own the trademark to register & enforce
    • Should comply with PTO requirements for certification marks to be registered & enforceable
    • Aaron: Ought to be a certification mark for FDC3 compliance

Commentary from the meeting:

  • Minutes embargo
    • FINOS will investigate the feasibility of and work involved in implementing a 48 hour minutes embargo and will report back to the group on options. (Action with Rob.)
    • If there is a significant amount of work involved then the group should re-visit the importance and decide if it is worth the effort.
  • FDC3 Badging
    • There is still some work to determine what the certification badge means, how to use it consistently and how to ensure it is not used purely or largely for self-promotion. Neil and Nick have an open task around definition of certification and welcome feedback from the group.
    • It should be clear that this is compliance badging and not simply a badge to say that you are an FDC3 member.
20 minGovernancegroup

decide on process for ratifying standards.  

Proposed outline:

  • Proposed standard raised by WG
    • by consensus
    • by majority vote if consensus can't be reached (good faith effort)
  • Proposal Published on Confluence or Github (depending on WG)
  • Proposed standard presented at next general meeting
  • Mailing Group set up for Proposal comments
  • 2 weeks comment period from community
  • PMC ratification
    • by consensus
    • by majority vote if consensus can't be reached (good faith effort)
  • Ratified standards should be versioned and published on confluence

For Use Cases, the process is simpler:

  • Proposed standard raised by WG
    • by consensus
    • by majority vote if consensus can't be reached (good faith effort)
  • Ratified use cases should be clearly marked and published on confluence

Commentary from the meeting:

There are still a few things to work out including

  • Where proposed standards get documented - this needs to be a place where people can comment without having to be in the meeting.
  • This can be tricky as some members can't comment on GitHub and some can't even post to Confluence.
  • FINOS will look at the options for this and report back to the group. (Action with Rob)
  • Given that ratification of use cases will be more frequent there may be no need to ratify these by the PMC, working group ratification may suffice. 
20minAOBgroup

Action items

  • No labels