| [jakarta.ee-wg] Jakarta EE Working Group Charter requires attention] Committee Calls "private" vs "public" + Misc |
I want to pick up this thread originally started by Amelia some weeks ago. My opinion is that in an open source community, all communication should be public, including project leadership and management discussions. This certainly includes the Jakarta EE Committee calls. I do not see any reason to frequently have private communication. There might be single events where secrets MUST be kept, but these are just exceptional cases -- not vice versa. Keeping all other communication private imposes "a bad code smell" on our organization. So I propose an official voting among all stakeholders whether to stop this privacy immediately OR whether to clearly explain the NEED for it. Thanks -Markus Hola Jakartees, With August, new opportunities/new challenges/ more contributing to Jakarta EE could bring many of us closer! As such, I ask: Why are the Jakarta EE Committee calls still private in 2020? At the beginning when the Jakarta EE Charter was being drafted in Feb 2018 (please see below the Carter history), those of us involved understood that the need for private calls on the 3 committees was required due to the on-going Java EE legal trademark conversations between Oracle & the EF. Everyone knows the end-result of those talks by reading Jakarta EE Rights to Java Trademarks published on May 3rd, 2019 The vision everyone has in mind were to establish as much transparency, accountability, ownership, and earn-protect trust by having public calls. By everyone, I mean everyone currently listed under the Strategic Membership, who was also a member of the initial Organizations supporting the initiate under the Proposal WG lifecycle (step 2 for the creation of a WG under the EF). We agreed that the calls will be converted to public as soon as the legal talks were completed. Well, they were finalized on May 2019. It has been +1 year and I am wondering why those meetings are still private today. Only the 6 orgs can vote to change what current is. It is that easy based on what was agreed on the past. If something change, lets explain what change and what keeping what currently is serves best for the Jakarta EE project and its community. The current private Body calls violate the Jakarta EE Vision and Scope listed as number #7:
How can the Community of Contributors help establish and drive a "funding model" that is sustainable if the Community is not invited into the room to own such a conversations? I recommend that the Steering committee body address this issue of the Charter via this open forum. ----- If anyone cares to read the Jakarta EE Charter, the brainstorming bare minimum for such those Body meetings is still written as follows for: Steering Committee Meetings
Specification Committee Meetings
Marketing Committee Meetings
---- Tracing to understand what went down when Java EE was moved into the Eclipse Foundation - zoom out: During the Jakarta EE WG lifecycle status: 1. Opportunity= private> Conversations btw Oracle and EF 2. Proposal=public> gather-together into the ONE group potential Members & Contributors alike with a minimum of 3 Organizations 3. Incubation=public > within the success criteria check list, the requirement of a minimum of 5 Organizations goes 4. Operational =public The Jakarta EE WG Charter section Membership lists five Bodies: Strategic, Enterprise, Participant, Committer, and Guest. Charter revision is as follows:
Amelia Eiras Tribe: http://tomitribe.com https://tribestream.io OSS: http://microprofile.io https://jakarta.ee |
