Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[microprofile-wg] [MPWG Trademark & Compatibility Minutes] Oct 18th, 2021

Video recording

Thank you, John for the upload of the recording and Ed for helping take good notes. 

October 18th

MicroProfilers: [add yourself to the minutes & help with the write-up]

  • Amelia Eiras (Tomitribe)

  • Ed Bratt (Oracle)

  • Emily Jiang (IBM)

  • Ryan St. James (Tomitribe)

  • John Clingan (Red Hat)

  • Paul Buck (Eclipse Foundation)

Agenda: MPWG Trademark & Compatibility

Reference: Tracking Inventory Sheet - General  by ownership and managed by the WG & EMO

MPWG Repo Trademark git issues Reference: Trademark - General 

  • [CONSOLIDATED] Survey Monkey voting process on MP Compatible Logo #585  6 tasks ongoing

    • [Ryan] will provide feedback on 591

    • It is likely that after testing and helping Ryan fix anything that needs fixing on designing the SurveyMonkey account, we can pilot the tool by participating in a short ‘voting” survey on the current choices to make sure that nothing is a miss before sending that vote access to the Community forum mailing list.

  • [CONSOLIDATED] Swag Update #597   6 tasks ongoing

    • Before the update work starts, we need to decide on extra shirts, hoodies, etc value

    • This relates to Swag & Events budget allocation of $25,200

    • What else besides the shirts, stickers, hoodies should be valuable in the form of swag?

    • Events: Are mostly in support of JUGs & Communities that support via actions the adoption of MicroProfile - 

  •  Current budget available for BRAINSTORMING $9752 

    • Infra $ 3272

    • Contingency $6480

  • [Amelia] Swag distribution Spreadsheet - Distribution plan - with List of JUGs

    • I recommend individual tickets get created to enable the diverse communities to collaborate with MP openly. Only addresses & such logistics will be retrieved via a new google e-form that extracts such information.  

    • Most often JUGs ship stuff to its members. There is also where MPWG can support with a portion of its budget to enable for local shipment to occur by such entities. 

Discussion in meeting:

  • Discussion w/Amelia and Paul regarding lines 10 and 14 in Tracking Inventory sheet. Paul has responded to embedded comments of the Document. Will work with EF to resolve any potential discrepancies.

  • EF is working on an updated license agreement (line 14 of the tracking sheet.) Discussion on the e-mail thread is in progress. Docs are not yet ready for member review.

  • Survey Monkey progress -- See issue #591 -- Ryan is working on some prototype examples. Will have a link to the complete views. Meeting feedback, for the ballot, one image per option would suffice. Paul suggests the images be provided with less back-story. (Improves the “impression” input)

  • Ryan will continue this work. A short test period will take place. (See consolidated Survey Monkey issue #585 above.)

  • Discussed Data Protection Impact Assessment (issue #593). The prospective document will be circulated for review by the steering committee. If there are concerns a more formal process will be taken. See the issue for a link to the DPIA. This documents how the information will be used and for what purpose (Used to assure a single vote per user; Collected by Survey Monkey tool). Eclipse Foundation requires this document.

  • Discussed Swag update (Issue 596) -- (Conversation included some discussion about carry-over budget. This included reference to prior discussion with Clark Brundy (Sp?). Refer to the meeting of Oct. 4th for more details. In general, Eclipse Foundation expects the working groups’ fees to be used for the year in which they are contributed by the members. There are no laws explicitly written by the EF demanding that a WG “must use” all its money. 

    • Paul recommends (the EMO can recommend stuff and it is up to the WGs to accept or skip the recommendations) that these expenses for the budget be made in the current funding period.) Clark is looking at the existing program plan and returning with a proposal to allocate the remaining budget within the program plan.  

    • It was stated during the meeting that the MPWG doesn’t wish to buy EF Services & will continue focusing on getting MP activities by MicroProfilers. This is shown on all the discussions while the MPWG was being created and the Charter itself. 

Back to the top