+1. I completely agree to the views of James and Nicolas below. Guidelines for user groups make for a more cohesive community building approach.
Regards, moinak. On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Nicolas Dorfsman <ndo at unikservice.eu> wrote: > > Le 15 oct. 08 ? 20:35, James Carlson a ?crit : > >> Stephen Lau writes: >>> Additionally, letting groups decide their own ways of running the >>> group >>> makes for better scale rather than the OGB trying to set standard >>> procedures to apply to both groups as large as ON, and groups as >>> small >>> as our San Francisco OSUG. >> >> Where "running the group" means details such as who evaluates an RTI >> and how that's done (for ON), I agree. That can and should be >> delegated and not specified by the OGB. >> >> When it comes to common standards, though, such as how votes (if any) >> are held, or how the various OGB-defined roles are used, I think there >> ought to be common practices across groups. It's ok if that's not in >> the constitution itself, and is instead in some OGB-sponsored "how to >> do the group thing" document, but I don't think it ought to be >> delegated entirely. > > James is completly right. > > User groups have to be considered as important people in the new > constitution. > OpenSource is made by contributors. Contribution could be in term of > money, but in most case the "contributor" is somebody who is giving > his time to improve/evangelize/etc. > Our members are giving time and money to go forward. Do they have any > chance to vote for OGB or any other decisions which modifies the > OpenSolaris way ? > I'm sure you'd answer yes to this last question. It implies the > constitution writes down some standards about how we run our groups, > or at least how members of ug could become member/contributor/whatever > of OpenSolaris government. > Without those standards, our own board may take decisions without any > references...which could be interpreted as power abuse by our members. > > >> Delegating this completely means that new people approaching >> OpenSolaris can't count on a consistent set of processes or roles in >> each group (thus setting us up for personal conflicts), and it makes >> cooperation between groups (required for most non-trivial projects) >> much more difficult, and it means that we can't reasonably set up >> common infrastructure for all to use. It seems to have no benefits >> whatsover; it's an unnecessary amount of rope. > > Exactly ! > > Nicolas > > > > > > 01010101 01001110 01001001 01011000 > Nicolas Dorfsman > ndo at unikservice.com / ndo at guses.org > Phone: +33 6 7981 4486 > Skype: ndorfsman > > http://www.guses.org - French Speaking (Open)Solaris User Group > http://www.solaris-fr.org - French OpenSolaris Wiki > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > advocacy-discuss mailing list > advocacy-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss > -- ================================ http://www.belenix.org/ http://moinakg.wordpress.com/
