| Board Meeting [message #560371] |
Wed, 13 June 2007 04:58 |
 Scott Lewis
Messages: 1038
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Committer Reps,
I understand there is a Board meeting coming up next week (June 18) and
I want to start a dialog here about what committer issues may be brought
up/discussed before the Board.
Since the squeaky wheel gets the attention :)...as a committer, here are
my 'pet peeves' for the Board:
1) The IP process...for Europa and beyond. I continually have the
impression that all the work of the IP process falls on two groups:
a) the foundation personnel (from outside it seems that more and more
foundation dollars are likely going to feed that monster) and I don't
see how that scales as Ganymede is even bigger than Europa.
b) the committers (who do the work associated with adding license files,
about files, etc. etc.).
The costs (on committers, largely) and benefits (commercial members) are
not equitable IMHO. I understand the benefit to commercial members, but
like I said I think the costs and benefits are not equitably distributed.
2) The lack of company diversity on projects. I still think this is a
particularly insidious problem for the Board and committers...one which
I don't think the strategics or the add-on providers will do anything
about until pushed by the committers/committer reps.
3) The 'project as technical silos' problem. Although related to 2,
it's not the same. Even if projects had representatives from multiple
companies they still might not be cooperating/collaborating across
projects. Especially with Europa, it's becoming clear to me that there
is a lot of duplication of effort/code/work across multiple projects
(e.g. ECF and DSDP and others all doing service discovery stuff, etc).
I don't think this is healthy for the committers in the long term.
4) The lack of membership support for volunteer projects. Does the EF
membership want only corporate run projects? If so, is this a healthy
environment for committers in terms of innovation and interest?
5) Lack of follow-thru of strategic members on membership requirements
WRT people commitment. Each strategic member is required provide a
minimum of 8 committers (See Exhibit B in membership agreement:
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse%20MEMBERSHIP%20 AGMT%202007_04_04%20Final.pdf).
I'm pretty sure that a good number of the current strategics are not
meeting this requirement (even in name only), and I think the result is
greater burden on the strategics that are, and a greater burden on
smaller orgs and independents.
I suppose that's enough from me for now. I expect/hope that others have
input about what the committers should be discussing at the upcoming
Board meeting...and hopefully they will have the time to discuss some of
their plans in this regard publicly before the actual meeting.
Thanks to Chris, Jeff, Konstantin, Ed, and Darin for representing the
community.
Scott
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03565 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
