Proposed Charter for OpenSource WG

On Oct 15, 2012, at 12:11 PM, Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> wrote:

> 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.

I asked for clarity (of intend), not for enumeration (of software, protocols, or topics).

> 
>> 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. :-)

As long as the chairs have a handle to declare a topic out of scope.

> 
>> 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. 

Yes, thanks, that is indeed what I tried to communicate, but couldn't formulate so succinct.

--Olaf

NLnet
Labs
Olaf M. Kolkman

www.NLnetLabs.nl
olaf at NLnetLabs.nl

Science Park 400, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ripe-list/attachments/20121015/549a7f51/attachment.html>