Versions Compared

Old Version 9

changes.mady.by.user rsteans

Saved on

compared with

New Version 10

changes.mady.by.user Maria Whitaker

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...


https://bluejeans.com/128863099

...

  • Come to agreement about final points in document that will be sent out to community for voting.

Discussion items

TimeItemWhoNotes
15 min

House keeping: update about phone call with Mark and Richard; see re-written intro in doc

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DtKOO8MJTU7k6svMrvO2lM_ZrMep1-6s0xVOSf05PUI/edit?usp=sharing


https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ja_ZgJVjBea8EH-DoVRs3JVk6ya8q-kX_iPHKsKufaE/edit

Rosy, Carolyn, Mark
 60 min

There are 11 items that need to be decided.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DtKOO8MJTU7k6svMrvO2lM_ZrMep1-6s0xVOSf05PUI/edit?usp=sharing

  1. Comment about vote and contribution model in beginning--Can this be resolved now? Resolved

  2. Not more than one rep from any given Partner shall serve on the newly formed Steering. Need to come to agreement. Steering does not like this idea. Also need to come to agreement about when new election happens and subsequent.

  3. If the agreement is only one rep from one institution, that should cover the issue of whether people need to rotate off if they move institutions or do we need to specify?

  4. Steering Meeting in person once per year- yay or nay?

  5. Can we just say - “Will elect a Chair and Chair-Elect from among their membership”?  And let Steering sort it out. ⅓ restriction comment.

  6. Partners will have input to decide on order of which position will be hired first - Technical or Community Manager position.  Yay or nay? Do we say Tech Manager first?

  7. Principles for contribution model added - Partners will develop a contribution model which will get voted on, based on 4 Principles - Do we need to include all the verbage and brainstorming in this document?

  8. Contribution Model–new WG or this one?

  9. Resolved what happens when a PO steps away

  10. Support Simeon’s comments about Components Council making language stronger?

  11. Standing Working Groups?  Do we need this?

Rosy, Carolyn

 

15 min

Recap the sending out, the voting, next steps

Carolyn, Rosy, Ryan



Components Council versus Roadmap Council - Because Avalon and HyRax are not technically Components - and not hosted in Hyrax Github

Action items

  •  Rosalyn Metz: Update the term components council to roadmap council
  •   


Meeting Notes


Housekeeping:  Mark, Ryan, CC, Rosy, Richard Green - talk about what we're actually voting on - 

Discussed what it was Steering saw us voting on - around steering implementing - Partners recommend and steering is implementing in partnership with Partners.  Outcome of vote - want Steering to work with partners via WG's to clarify and implement rec's.  


1 partner one vote, 2/3rds - will name numbers (ex:  24 of 36 partners).  

Take it upon ourselves to make sure we get all the votes.  It will take x number of Yes votes - to state we're moving forward.

Steering is not ratifying these rec's - Steering is implementing with Partners

How we will take the vote:  identifying the contact - can't dictate how partners do that.  Finding a contact to be able to say - collect voters ID via a Spreadsheet

Steering is culling some Partners who aren't active - 

UK is closed the week of April 



  1. Comment about vote and contribution model in beginning--Can this be resolved now? Resolved

...