Hi, I have to admit I have difficulty understanding meaning of vote for Beijing architecture at this point of time (and also understanding the meaning of failure of this vote).
Usually, architecture is agreed when Release starts – otherwise how different projects can plan their work/develop their functionalities? And what this vote result means? My assumption was that architecture approval AT THIS POINT of time is purely bureaucratic, for book keeping. I don’t know what will be our next steps – I do believe we must establish some clear rules on when architecture should be approved for any Release (and what such an approved architecture should include in terms of contents/level of details for a different involved modules). I also believe such an approval MUST happen prior to M1 of any Release. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:[email protected]] From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kenny Paul Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 2:31 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [onap-tsc-vote] ONAP Beijing Architecture Approval (ends 5PM Pacific, March 20) (Bcc’d to onap-tsc for Community visibility) The proposed ONAP Beijing Architecture v2.0.3 was NOT approved. Votes needed to pass: 10 Votes cast: 10 Votes in favor: 9 Votes against: 1 Abstentions: 9 Company Member Vote AMDOCS Alla Goldner 1 AT&T Mazin Gilbert 1 Bell Canada David Sauvageau China Mobile Lingli Deng 1 China Telecom Xiaojun Xie 1 Cisco Frank Brockners Cloudify Amir Levy Ericsson Stephen Terrill Huawei Christopher Donley 1 IBM Jason Hunt 1 Intel Rajesh Gadiyar Nokia Ranny Haiby Orange Jamil Chawki -1 Reliance Jio Aayush Bhatnagar Tech Mahindra Dhananjay Pavgi 1 Turk Telecom Cosar Baykal VMWare Xinhui Li Vodafone Susana Sabater 1 ZTE Zhaoxing Meng 1 For reference: Section 3.c of the ONAP Technical Charter c. Except as provided in Section 7.c. and 8.a, decisions by vote at a meeting require a majority vote of those in attendance, provided quorum is met. Decisions made by electronic vote without a meeting require a majority vote of all voting members of the TSC. Vote thread archive: https://lists.onap.org/pipermail/onap-tsc-vote/2018-March/000441.html Best Regards, -kenny Kenny Paul, Technical Program Manager, The Linux Foundation [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>, 510.766.5945 San Francisco Bay Area, Pacific Time Zone On Mar 15, 2018, at 11:18 AM, Kenny Paul <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: The TSC approves the ONAP Beijing Architecture v2.0.3 as documented here: Beijing Architecture<https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Beijing+Architecture?src=contextnavpagetreemode> Please respond with a +1, 0 -1 This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
_______________________________________________ ONAP-TSC mailing list [email protected] https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc
