+1 for Steve's proposal to amend the charter. +1 for Chris's proxy until changes are finalised & vetted.
BR, Viswa <http://www.verizon.com> Viswanath Kumar Skand Priya Senior Architect Technology, Architecture & Planning On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:52 AM Lingli Deng <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 to the proposal for having a proxy for transition. > > What ever the new TSC decided to do with this situation, we would not want > to have lengthy discussion over this, but given the fact that it won't be > resolved in this week before Chris's leave, having him assign a proxy would > be helpful in keeping the TSC functional during this transition period. > > Lingli/邓灵莉 > > 中国移动通信研究院 > > [email protected] > > > ----邮件原文---- > *发件人：*Alla Goldner <[email protected]> > *收件人：*"[email protected]" <[email protected]> > *抄 送: *(无) > *发送时间：*2018-09-24 13:47:39 > *主题：*Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Seat Vanacy > > > > Hi all, > > > I believe our interest is to avoid lengthy discussions and, instead, > leverage other open source communities' experience. We spent at least 6 > months debating the elections, left several big gaps in definitions, known > in advance, and eventually face one of them right away. > > While having a reserved SP seat and consequent handling is something we > invented in ONAP, therefore we will have no choice, but closing all its > definition gaps, the rest of the topics should be covered as done by > another open source communities (of course, with appropriate definitions > included into TSC charter firstly!). > > Alexis provided information about ODL. Kenny, could you provide us with > the similar information about several other open source communities and > their related practice, both inside and outside of Linux Foundation? > > > In the mean time, as I don't believe we will close it during one week, > Chaker will be Chris's proxy. > > > > Best regards, Alla > > > Sent from Nine > ------------------------------ > *From:* Christopher Donley <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Monday, 24 September 2018 03:02 > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Seat Vanacy > > Thanks for kicking off this discussion. > > A few thoughts: > > - > > Technically, an individual is elected to a seat, not a company. If > the individual were to move to another company and still participate in > ONAP, that individual would still remain on the TSC (subject to the > per-company maximum). Mine is a special case, since I don't expect to be > active in ONAP after this week. > - > > Another option offered to all TSC members is to appoint a proxy in the > event that someone is unavailable to participate for a period of time. > Previous TSC members have had long-term proxies extending several months. > Technically, I could not resign and appoint a long-term proxy. That > proxy would remain valid as long as he or she doesn't miss 3 consecutive > meetings (at least until the next election). However, I remain steadfastly > committed to elections, and would like to see a special election to > replace me. My decision to leave is a personal one, and should in no way > disadvantage Huawei. Huawei remains committed to ONAP, has many people who > qualify as "active", and is still the #2 contributor to ONAP. Huawei > deserves fair consideration through the election process, just like > everyone else. > > > So, in the case of a TSC member resigning, I believe the TSC should > initiate a special election to fill the seat at the earliest possible > opportunity. Because we instituted a one-rep-per-company rule, every > company only nominated one person. It's not fair to go back to the > previous election results, since no back-ups were considered. I support > Kenny's and Steve's suggestions. > > As I mentioned last week, I will remain active in ONAP through the end of > the week. I will resign my seat as soon as my successor is selected. In > the event that this is not resolved before Friday, I officially appoint > Chaker Al Hakim as my proxy until such time as my seat is filled by > special election. > > Chris > From: <[email protected]> on behalf of Srini < > [email protected]> > Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Date: Sunday, September 23, 2018 at 3:16 PM > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Seat Vanacy > > We also need to consider two cases > > > > 1. Where a TSC member moves from one company to another company > that has TSC representative already. > > 2. Where a TSC member moves from one company to another that does > not have TSC representative. > > > > 1st case is simple and it can be considered as TSC member resigning. > > 2nd case is complex. Would there be an election? Or would that member > continues to be in TSC. Since we have 1 member per company limitation, it > is fair to consider this also as a resignation. > > > > Thanks > > Srini > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Stephen Terrill > *Sent:* Sunday, September 23, 2018 2:59 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Seat Vanacy > > > > Hi, > > > > To this effect. An appointed size was agreed. I think it makes sense to > run a new election for that seat – continuing with the previous voting list > does not take into account the current situation, as the voting was in the > context of an earlier situation: > > > > We need to take into account two situations as I see it: > > - Any TSC member is no longer able to support the role > > - The TSC member that can no longer support the role is a chair or > vice chair. > > - We need to cater for the appointed positions as well. > > > > To this effect, can we amend the community charter as follows: > > - Add to section 4.2.3: > > o 4.2.3.3 TSC member abdication > > § In the event of a TSC member no longer being able to continue being a > member of the TSC: > > · If the TSC position was from an operator, the operator may > appoint a member that fulfils the criteria of being an active member; if > that is not feasible then the operator may appoint any member. If this is > not done, then the seat is considered vacant. (Additional amendment to > consider: If the TSC member that abdicated continues as an active member > from the same company, then the TSC seat is considered vacant (I am not > stronge on this, it just to avoid using this clause as a means to replace > TSC members). > > · If the TSC position is from one of the elected positions, an > election for that single position is held. The conditions of the election > are the same as for any TSC election. > > § If the said position was of that of a TSC chair or vice-chair, then > the TSC chair or vice chair position will undergo a re-election after the > successful appointment of the new TSC member. > > § When the next General TSC election is held, the said TSC position will > also be included in the general TSC election. > > > > BR, > > > > Steve > > > > *From:*[email protected] <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Frank > Brockners via Lists.Onap.Org > *Sent:* Sunday, September 23, 2018 7:19 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Seat Vanacy > > > > Hi Kenny, > > > > Thanks for the summary. As a community member, I’d prefer if the TSC would > quickly amend the current charter to cover the case of TSC members stepping > down from their role. Any other approach would be a shot from the hip – > and might be in conflict to the ultimate policy that the TSC would come up > with. The amendment should cover the considerations that you list below, > especially the fact that the TSC now consists of elected members and not > representatives of parties, companies, etc. In that, a TSC differs from > most of the parliaments, where members often represent parties, so that > successors are automatically picked from a list. > > > > Regards, > > Frank > > > > *From:*[email protected] <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Kenny > Paul > *Sent:* Sonntag, 23. September 2018 18:43 > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [onap-tsc] TSC Seat Vanacy > > > > I wanted to follow up on the discussion regarding a special election due > to Chris taking a new job. One of the first questions asked was, "What > does the Charter say?" Neither the Charter or Community Document says > anything about a vacancy. In the absence of any specific language, the > default should be to honor what language there is. Currently the Community > Document says: > > *4.1.1.2 **Size and Structure* > > The TSC shall consist of eighteen (18) seats > > Nine (9) seats on the TSC are to be reserved for Operators > > Only one (1) person from any company, or group of related companies (as > defined in section 4.4.4.1) may be a member at any given time. > > > > As such, my guidance to the TSC is to immediately authorize a special > election using the criteria currently defined in the Community Document, > plain and simple. > > > > There were a several alternatives to a special election which have been > suggested. While it is well within the TSC's right to pursue any of these > alternatives, all must be thoroughly scrutinized through the lens of > fairness, trust, and responsibility to the community. > > > > - > > *Leaving the seat vacant until the next election cycle* > > It took 6 months to debate and vote on membership criteria, and another > full month to run an election. Leaving the seat vacant until the next > scheduled election implies that after all that work the TSC doesn't care > about being fully functional. This would be a huge hit to the community's > trust of the TSC. > > > > - > > *Delay any decision on an election until the TSC amends the Community > Document to address how to handle a vacancy* > > This is marginally better than leaving the seat vacant, because who knows > how long amending the Community Document might take. I would encourage the > TSC to take up amending the Community Document to cover one or more of the > operational and governance gaps that exist, however it is unfair to the > ONAP community to hold the recently vacated seat hostage to those > discussions. > > > > - > > *Have Chris appoint his replacement* > > When the TSC was comprised of only appointed individuals doing this would > have been fine course of action. In fact, there were a couple instances > back in March where this occurred. Now that we have moved from an > appointed TSC to an elected TSC, such an appointment by a member is > completely inappropriate. > > > > - > > *Make the next runner up in the August election the new TSC member* > > While true the seat does not belong to Huawei, it would be exceeding > unfair to them, especially as the 2nd largest contributor to the Project, > to suddenly be out in the cold with absolutely no chance to even compete > for a seat they once held. > > > > I don't like creating work for myself and a TCS election is indeed a great > deal of work. The thought of having to run a new election is mind-numbing > but I welcome it gladly because it is absolutely the right thing to do. > > > > I recommend a one week nomination period, and a one week voting period. > (The prior election was lengthened to two + two specifically to accommodate > summer vacations). I am at ONS-Europe this week and out the first week of > October on family business. The earliest I can commit to kicking off the > process (after revalidating qualified Active Community Members) would be > Oct. 11th, putting the close of the election on Oct. 25. > > > > Please let me know your thoughts. > > Best Regards, > -kenny > > *Kenny Paul, Technical Program Manager, The Linux Foundation* > [email protected], 510.766.5945 > San Francisco Bay Area, Pacific Time Zone > > > > > > > > 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amdocs.com_about_email-2Ddisclaimer&d=DwMFaQ&c=udBTRvFvXC5Dhqg7UHpJlPps3mZ3LRxpb6__0PomBTQ&r=9F3pNUkzjE-2v1eTClkRVakDRN8GH7Bm-wt1lWkxoUyyDORTqf5MxNO_GrMBs0gZ&m=EpaBhpnrQq-kgzW7iY-YGfmosEiyTcQcOr8XG8uW14A&s=X4Mv5uRb2imeiS1lP3B3ThyE827PAwlITWpYV5C_MHU&e=> > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#3751): https://lists.onap.org/g/ONAP-TSC/message/3751 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26197751/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/ONAP-TSC/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
