Proposed Charter for OpenSource WG
Jim Reid jim at rfc1035.com
Mon Oct 15 12:11:39 CEST 2012
On 15 Oct 2012, at 10:17, Olaf Kolkman wrote: > 1. Are you consciously not mentioning DNS software? Do you expect > DNS Open Source discussions to remain in the DNS WG? I think clarity > is needed to avoid duplication. A charter needs to be suitably vague to allow for flexibility. In the case of this suggested WG, I think its charter should not enumerate lists of software that are in or out of scope. These will change over time => endless rechartering and existential debates that are best avoided. > 2. There might be vendors that do not provide open-source but do > have a genuine interest in understanding the needs of the community > and would like to work with the community; are those welcome? There > are probably also Open Source developers that need to run a business > and use this as a marketing event. I understand you wouldn't want > that (at least I don't) but how can you make the distinction? A > paragraph about what this WG should not be might clarify. It it takes more than a paragraph to define a WG charter, we're doomed. :-) > In general I like the idea. Olaf, you seem to be hinting the new WG could be about tools (open source or otherwise) rather than just open source software. That would be a better choice IMO. A tools WG might well focus on open source software. However its charter could/should be wide enough to incorporate other things which are not covered by a BSD or GPL type licence but are of general interest/use for running a network. BTW, the Chair(s) of this new WG should be able to weed out salespitches without having this requirement etched in stone in the charter. Who knows, maybe the WG members will want fluffy marketing presentations?