Simon Phipps wrote: > For governance, we need a rational set of top-level groups with which > the OGB can communicate. They need to be our "existing" top-level > groups - ON, SFW, ARC, Advocacy etc. There need to be enough of them > so that the "soup" is distributed across them without large > concentrations under a single top-level group, and few enough to make > regular reporting feasible. They can slowly change as the community > slowly evolves.
None of those are 'umbrella' groups in the sense that you seem to be suggesting. They may be large and/or important groups in their own right, but they do not have subservient groups reporting to them. You seem to be suggesting that we have some sort of hierarchical organisation - that would appear to be a radical departure from the current setup, and I'm not at all clear how we would get to there from where we are now. >> If we are drawing lines around what we are doing today, we are doing >> user groups, consolidations, Projects as well as various forms of >> SIG/mailing lists. Forcing them all into a single "Group" umbrella >> seems counterproductive... Umm, I don't think that is what is being suggested. We are talking about categorising the different types of collectives, not enforcing a hierarchy. Think of it as a labelling exercise rather than a hierarchical reorg. > I'm not proposing using "Group" as the structural umbrella; we need a > number (15-ish) of top level Groups for that. Why do we need a hierarchy? > - "Group" is the class we are instantiating. > - For governance purposes, the OGB will instantiate a set of top-level > Groups. Those Groups will organise whichever other Groups they need to > function, and so on. > - For operational purposes, all Groups can relate to whichever other > Groups make sense. > - For website purposes, Groups can be listed in the sets that make the > most sense for each page of the site. So your use case below can be > accommodated. That all seems a little vague to me, at least. Who gets to decide what, and when it has to be decided by? -- Alan Burlison --
