(616) 347-8000 992610#
Attendees: Tim Carroll, Andy Gherna, Cris Holdorph, Benn Oshrin, Andrew Petro, Jonathan Markow
Absent: Susan Bramhall, Parker Grimes
Minutes by: Andrew Petro
No particular news or announcements.
No formal old action items reviewed, but St. Paul Followups for Incubation includes information about previous discussion at the St. Paul conference and followups there identified.
No formal old business reviewed, but St. Paul Followups for Incubation includes information about prior discussion at the St. Paul conference and followups there identified, and the Incubation Process - old page includes comments.
Jonathan Markow greeted participants and chaired the call.
Call participants briefly reviewed and discussed the goal of this working group.
Jonathan articulated thinking of the incubation working group as a subcommittee under the Board of Directors. Incubation WG does all things except make final decisions about incubation of projects, with the decision to accept a project happening at the Board level.
After discovering that some call participants had not yet read the Incubation Process - old in detail, Jonathan reviewed this process with call participants, walking it through from beginning to end in some detail. (This document has subsequently been updated by Benn Oshrin to reflect changes discussed on this call and a need for it to accommodate a particular use case for incubation of IdM core technologies project being shepherded by Rutgers but not desired to appear purely a Rutgers-local project, hence the perceived value in JASIG project incubation).
The call participants also reviewed St. Paul Followups for Incubation. The examples of what ought to be in Contrib in the process document are dated, not reflecting subsequent progress, and Andrew Petro took an action item to update them.
Participants discussed need for confidentiality in this Working Group. Andrew gave the motivating example that when a project is proposed for and requests incubation, this group will need to have a frank discussion of the suitability of the project for incubation. Andrew suggested that the minutes and meetings of the Working Group be closed and that the email lists and archive of the group be closed.
Benn suggested a model where confidentiality is maintained beginning with initial contact, up through the decision to accept a project for incubation. (We may or may not want to disclose a project is under consideration, but certainly nothing beyond that.) Once a project is accepted, all further process is public (unless specific requirements dictate otherwise), including regular status updated.
Benn articulated an idea of an Identity Management core technology project and wanting to be able to incubate this in JASIG. Participants discussed how to modify the Incubation Process document to accommodate this valid use case.
Benn Oshrin took an action item to propose revision to the Incubation Process document to better accommodate incubating his proposed project.
Briefly discussed prospects of incubating Bedework.
Meet again at UnConference. Dial in Cris? Parker?