-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hi All, There hasn't been much discussion that I've noticed on-list regarding support for/objections to the proposed technical advisory council mentioned in Derrick's document. There have been a number of such discussions with a subset of active OpenAFS developers participating, and to my knowledge, there is generally consensus (I include myself) that we would support the concept in some form, and would plan to participate. I think there are some open issues in the foundation space relating to the TAC, and final details of what will really exist, and exactly when the foundation will begin to exist formally. With regard to the TAC specifically, there seems to be an open question about how many seats it will have, eligibility/karma required to sit, and how the number of seats allocated to community members (which I believe would include all people I know to be probably interested in participating) would relate to seats allocated to corporate or sponsor members. So I'm highlighting those items for further discussion. I'd say for myself that if this is the way the community plans to move forward, that it might not be a bad idea for the community to simply get started organizing an informal proto-TAC and see what issues it's going to present, and what opportunities it may offer. Matt - -- Matt Benjamin The Linux Box 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 http://linuxbox.com tel. 734-761-4689 fax. 734-769-8938 cel. 734-216-5309 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJEKmOJiSUUSaRdSURCC7kAJ92VoLdSs24o+8oG7Lymlx9XQRySwCdGclf rnR10MrAJTqcl6BG4axM1Ww= =lg7T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
