John Plocher wrote: > This seems to drop User Groups and SIGs on the floor. Simon (and > others?) seemed to feel that making SIGs a high level thing was > undesirable, but were unclear as to what is expected to happen to > the current CGs that are not Consolidations. There also seems to > be an assumption that something will happen to Advocacy and User > Groups, but I am unclear as to what exactly it should be. Jim?
There is consensus to remove the OSUGs from being sponsored projects of Advocacy. Advocacy can continue along as a CG if it pleases, but the OSUGs are not a good fit under Advocacy in that hierarchical arrangement. The OSUGs should be a top level collective-group-thing named "User Groups" since that is the common term globally to describe who they are and what they do. They are locally-based communities. Also, OSUGs do not fit as projects, so there is no reason to list them among all the other development projects on the site. Their home as projects has been an excellent temporary solution, but now that we will have a more flexible webapp the OSUGs ought to be considered as their own category along side the other top level categories of Communities, Projects, etc. Jim -- http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris
