| [m2m-iwg] Fwd: RE: Modifications to the Steering Committee Participation Guidelines |
|
All, I think Rick Bullotta had a great question about the participation guidelines. He asked the question off-list but with his permission I am posting it on-list since I am sure other people have the same question. Ian -------- Original Message --------
Thanks
for the clarifications, Mike! From:
Mike Milinkovich [mailto:mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx] Rick, First off, please feel free to make comments like
that on the list. This is a perfectly valid issue and I would
write exactly this response on the public list. Secondly, I understand your point, but the way
Eclipse has always worked is that governance is based
on tangible contribution, while participation is open
to all. Open source is not a democracy, it is a meritocracy.
We rely on transparency to ensure that any egregious behaviour
is immediately noted and dealt with. This is somewhat in
contrast with standards organizations, which might be more
open on paper but get less done because it is a lot easier for
companies with no actual investment in the work to block
progress during confidential discussions. As we've discussed, in the case of IWGs,
participation does require membership, but everyone can
observe and comment transparently. In the case of our open
source projects, anyone can participate under our meritocratic
process. Small companies who want to have an influential role
should focus their attention on driving the direction of open
source projects. That's where the most tangible work happens,
and has the lowest barrier to entry. For companies who want to
participate in the IWG, to date we have had no companies which
have ever had a problem with them strongly influencing its
direction whether they are not they are on the steering
committee. Let me construct a fairly tangible example using
the roadmap.
Hope that helps. From:
Rick Bullotta [mailto:rick.bullotta@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] <OFFLIST> Thinking
about this a bit more, this requirement really blocks out
the new, smaller innovators from having an influential
role. The clear downside on new initiatives like this one
is that the larger, entrenched players will naturally be
interested in preserving the status quo, and the danger in
galvanizing “the old ways” instead of creating new
innovations and platforms that have a longer future. Just
thought I’d share those observations with you. </OFFLIST> From:
Rick Bullotta Hi,
Ian. FWIW,
that’s another reason why we (or most startups) couldn’t
participate (at least as steering committee members, which
would be the most valuable way to engage). Devoting two FT
resources just wouldn’t be an option. That’s nearly a $300K
per year commitment on its own. Best, Rick From:
m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ian Skerrett
Steering
committee member are required to: § Be
a Strategic, Enterprise or Solutions member of the Eclipse
Foundation. § Appoint
at least 2 developers/technical resources to contribute to
the creation of M2M WG technologies, roadmaps and technical
documents. § Regularly
participate in all M2M working group meetings and provide
timely feedback on the M2M working group documents. § Provide
announcement support for the official releases of the
working group (specifications, tools, …) and ongoing
promotion to M2M actors (solution providers, telcos, …).
Steering
committee member are required to: § Be
a Strategic, Enterprise or Solutions member of the Eclipse
Foundation. § Provide
at least 2 full-time equivalent resources, on an
annualized basis, that contribute to the activities of the
M2M IWG. The activities can include 1) committers
working on Eclipse open source projects that support the
M2M roadmap, 2) creation of roadmaps and technical
documents (including, for example, architectures,
blueprints and best practices) supporting the IWG work, 3)
evangelism and community development for the IWG and 4)
other activities agreed to by the Steering committee. § Regularly
participate in all M2M working group meetings and provide
timely feedback on the M2M working group documents. § Provide
announcement support for the official releases of the
working group (specifications, tools, …) and ongoing
promotion to M2M actors (solution providers, telcos, …). -- |
