Hi,
There has been a recent resurgence of interest in the NFV SIG, and in the interest of keeping the momentum going, I would like to step aside as SIG char, and recommend that Tom Herbert take over. Tom has taken on the packaging and building of VPP and DPDK-accelerated OVS for OPNFV, and has been active in the SIG in recent weeks, and I think he will help add the structure that has been sorely lacking from me in recent months.
I'm not sure what the process is for replacing a SIG chair - can someone let us know, please?
Thanks, Dave.
On 09/26/2016 03:15 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi,
There has been a recent resurgence of interest in the NFV SIG, and in the interest of keeping the momentum going, I would like to step aside as SIG char, and recommend that Tom Herbert take over. Tom has taken on the packaging and building of VPP and DPDK-accelerated OVS for OPNFV, and has been active in the SIG in recent weeks, and I think he will help add the structure that has been sorely lacking from me in recent months.
I'm not sure what the process is for replacing a SIG chair - can someone let us know, please?
I'll gladly be the policy wonk with some thoughts. ;-)
Although I helped write it, it's been a while so I went to review SIG governance:
https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/
Thanks to the Easter eggs in there from our past selves, here's my summary of the situations & steps:
tl;dnr ======
You need to talk with me, your Board mentor, and we need to get approval from the Board. A video face-to-face with you and Tom is also in order. Let's go ahead and thrash out the details in this thread, I'm expecting some input from others, and we'll just drive it to resolution.
SIG members, RDO folks, KB, Jim, -- I'm looking at you for input on leadership changes and mission, toward helping the NFV SIG get a clear path forward. I concur I'm seeing the resurgence of energy and want to help it/get out of its way.
wonky details =============
A. With a SIG in the early stages, a move to replace leadership of the SIG needs to managed hand-in-hand with your SIG mentor from the CentOS Board. Oh, hey, appears that's me![0]
B. That person's recommendation to the overall Board is going to carry a lot of weight, so make that person comfortable with the process and decision.[1] Let's talk here on list & maybe some directly, as needed, to work that out so we can get it to a Board vote in a reasonable time.
C. A video conference with the Board and the current & proposed SIG chairs would be a good idea. Public or private is a different question.[2]
D. Ultimately, at this early SIG maturity level ("Sandbox"), all new SIG members require Board approval. In practice we've been doing super-soft consensus, where we trust the Board mentor to oversee the project and member approvals without requiring an explicit +1.[3]
My last thought is to wonder if you and/or Tom Herbert are able to come to the CentOS Interlock on 9/10 of November in Paris? It might be a good chance to close a hand-off of the ecosystem relationships.
https://wiki.centos.org/Events/Interlock2016
Regards,
- Karsten, who was keeping notes anyway ...
Below quotes are from https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/ :
[0] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/NFV
[1] Conduct the business of the SIG following accepted open source practices around meritocracy and consensus decision making.
[2] All new committers, developers, SIG core team members, etc. must be approved by the Board.
[3] In both the Sandbox and Early SIGs, the role of the Board is primarily to facilitate the movement of those SIGs towards the Mature level; it serves as an initial gateway with the goal of getting out of the way of the SIGs.
Thanks, Dave.
Karsten,
Thanks for the detail info about governance and the process in Centos.
More comments in line below:
--Tom
On 09/26/2016 08:51 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
On 09/26/2016 03:15 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi,
There has been a recent resurgence of interest in the NFV SIG, and in the interest of keeping the momentum going, I would like to step aside as SIG char, and recommend that Tom Herbert take over. Tom has taken on the packaging and building of VPP and DPDK-accelerated OVS for OPNFV, and has been active in the SIG in recent weeks, and I think he will help add the structure that has been sorely lacking from me in recent months.
I'm not sure what the process is for replacing a SIG chair - can someone let us know, please?
I'll gladly be the policy wonk with some thoughts. ;-)
Although I helped write it, it's been a while so I went to review SIG governance:
https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/
Thanks to the Easter eggs in there from our past selves, here's my summary of the situations & steps:
tl;dnr
You need to talk with me, your Board mentor, and we need to get approval from the Board. A video face-to-face with you and Tom is also in order. Let's go ahead and thrash out the details in this thread, I'm expecting some input from others, and we'll just drive it to resolution.
SIG members, RDO folks, KB, Jim, -- I'm looking at you for input on leadership changes and mission, toward helping the NFV SIG get a clear path forward. I concur I'm seeing the resurgence of energy and want to help it/get out of its way.
wonky details
A. With a SIG in the early stages, a move to replace leadership of the SIG needs to managed hand-in-hand with your SIG mentor from the CentOS Board. Oh, hey, appears that's me![0]
B. That person's recommendation to the overall Board is going to carry a lot of weight, so make that person comfortable with the process and decision.[1] Let's talk here on list & maybe some directly, as needed, to work that out so we can get it to a Board vote in a reasonable time.
C. A video conference with the Board and the current & proposed SIG chairs would be a good idea. Public or private is a different question.[2]
OK, I will set up video con via BJN with you and Dave and anyone else that indicates interest.
D. Ultimately, at this early SIG maturity level ("Sandbox"), all new SIG members require Board approval. In practice we've been doing super-soft consensus, where we trust the Board mentor to oversee the project and member approvals without requiring an explicit +1.[3]
My last thought is to wonder if you and/or Tom Herbert are able to come to the CentOS Interlock on 9/10 of November in Paris? It might be a good chance to close a hand-off of the ecosystem relationships.
I would love to but I am booked for OVSCON on the 7th 8th and the ovs/dpdk design summit on the 10th.
Regards,
- Karsten, who was keeping notes anyway ...
Below quotes are from https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/ :
[0] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/NFV
[1] Conduct the business of the SIG following accepted open source practices around meritocracy and consensus decision making.
[2] All new committers, developers, SIG core team members, etc. must be approved by the Board.
[3] In both the Sandbox and Early SIGs, the role of the Board is primarily to facilitate the movement of those SIGs towards the Mature level; it serves as an initial gateway with the goal of getting out of the way of the SIGs.
Thanks, Dave.
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
As an NFV SIG committer and the packager for the only active project in the SIG (OpenDaylight), just wanted to throw in my +1.
Thanks,
Daniel Farrell Software Engineer, Red Hat SDN Team https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/user:dfarrell07
----- Original Message -----
Karsten,
Thanks for the detail info about governance and the process in Centos.
More comments in line below:
--Tom
On 09/26/2016 08:51 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
On 09/26/2016 03:15 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi,
There has been a recent resurgence of interest in the NFV SIG, and in the interest of keeping the momentum going, I would like to step aside as SIG char, and recommend that Tom Herbert take over. Tom has taken on the packaging and building of VPP and DPDK-accelerated OVS for OPNFV, and has been active in the SIG in recent weeks, and I think he will help add the structure that has been sorely lacking from me in recent months.
I'm not sure what the process is for replacing a SIG chair - can someone let us know, please?
I'll gladly be the policy wonk with some thoughts. ;-)
Although I helped write it, it's been a while so I went to review SIG governance:
https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/
Thanks to the Easter eggs in there from our past selves, here's my summary of the situations & steps:
tl;dnr
You need to talk with me, your Board mentor, and we need to get approval from the Board. A video face-to-face with you and Tom is also in order. Let's go ahead and thrash out the details in this thread, I'm expecting some input from others, and we'll just drive it to resolution.
SIG members, RDO folks, KB, Jim, -- I'm looking at you for input on leadership changes and mission, toward helping the NFV SIG get a clear path forward. I concur I'm seeing the resurgence of energy and want to help it/get out of its way.
wonky details
A. With a SIG in the early stages, a move to replace leadership of the SIG needs to managed hand-in-hand with your SIG mentor from the CentOS Board. Oh, hey, appears that's me![0]
B. That person's recommendation to the overall Board is going to carry a lot of weight, so make that person comfortable with the process and decision.[1] Let's talk here on list & maybe some directly, as needed, to work that out so we can get it to a Board vote in a reasonable time.
C. A video conference with the Board and the current & proposed SIG chairs would be a good idea. Public or private is a different question.[2]
OK, I will set up video con via BJN with you and Dave and anyone else that indicates interest.
D. Ultimately, at this early SIG maturity level ("Sandbox"), all new SIG members require Board approval. In practice we've been doing super-soft consensus, where we trust the Board mentor to oversee the project and member approvals without requiring an explicit +1.[3]
My last thought is to wonder if you and/or Tom Herbert are able to come to the CentOS Interlock on 9/10 of November in Paris? It might be a good chance to close a hand-off of the ecosystem relationships.
I would love to but I am booked for OVSCON on the 7th 8th and the ovs/dpdk design summit on the 10th.
Regards,
- Karsten, who was keeping notes anyway ...
Below quotes are from https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/ :
[0] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/NFV
[1] Conduct the business of the SIG following accepted open source practices around meritocracy and consensus decision making.
[2] All new committers, developers, SIG core team members, etc. must be approved by the Board.
[3] In both the Sandbox and Early SIGs, the role of the Board is primarily to facilitate the movement of those SIGs towards the Mature level; it serves as an initial gateway with the goal of getting out of the way of the SIGs.
Thanks, Dave.
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-- *Thomas F Herbert* SDN Group Office of Technology *Red Hat* _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
KB, Karsten,
Interest in NFV SIG has been heating up lately.
I have been acting chair of NFV Sig but there are some lose ends.
1. I am not sure if I have received formal approval as chair. I have received endorsements from current members including Dfarrel and DNeary, the acting chair and active contributor/committor at the time. I understand that this requires board approval. If so, can that this item be placed on the agenda for the next board meeting?
2. I have an account on wiki.centos.org but don't have permissions to edit the NFV SIG wiki page, https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/NFV Do I need a bugz for this?
3. Do additional package builders/members in the NFV SIG require board approval in addition to SIG chair approval? I have received informally two NFV SIG member requests. I have asked requestors to file bugz.
Thanks,
--Tom
On 10/20/2016 11:01 AM, Daniel Farrell wrote:
As an NFV SIG committer and the packager for the only active project in the SIG (OpenDaylight), just wanted to throw in my +1.
Thanks,
Daniel Farrell Software Engineer, Red Hat SDN Team https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/user:dfarrell07
----- Original Message -----
Karsten,
Thanks for the detail info about governance and the process in Centos.
More comments in line below:
--Tom
On 09/26/2016 08:51 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
On 09/26/2016 03:15 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi,
There has been a recent resurgence of interest in the NFV SIG, and in the interest of keeping the momentum going, I would like to step aside as SIG char, and recommend that Tom Herbert take over. Tom has taken on the packaging and building of VPP and DPDK-accelerated OVS for OPNFV, and has been active in the SIG in recent weeks, and I think he will help add the structure that has been sorely lacking from me in recent months.
I'm not sure what the process is for replacing a SIG chair - can someone let us know, please?
I'll gladly be the policy wonk with some thoughts. ;-)
Although I helped write it, it's been a while so I went to review SIG governance:
https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/
Thanks to the Easter eggs in there from our past selves, here's my summary of the situations & steps:
tl;dnr
You need to talk with me, your Board mentor, and we need to get approval from the Board. A video face-to-face with you and Tom is also in order. Let's go ahead and thrash out the details in this thread, I'm expecting some input from others, and we'll just drive it to resolution.
SIG members, RDO folks, KB, Jim, -- I'm looking at you for input on leadership changes and mission, toward helping the NFV SIG get a clear path forward. I concur I'm seeing the resurgence of energy and want to help it/get out of its way.
wonky details
A. With a SIG in the early stages, a move to replace leadership of the SIG needs to managed hand-in-hand with your SIG mentor from the CentOS Board. Oh, hey, appears that's me![0]
B. That person's recommendation to the overall Board is going to carry a lot of weight, so make that person comfortable with the process and decision.[1] Let's talk here on list & maybe some directly, as needed, to work that out so we can get it to a Board vote in a reasonable time.
C. A video conference with the Board and the current & proposed SIG chairs would be a good idea. Public or private is a different question.[2]
OK, I will set up video con via BJN with you and Dave and anyone else that indicates interest.
D. Ultimately, at this early SIG maturity level ("Sandbox"), all new SIG members require Board approval. In practice we've been doing super-soft consensus, where we trust the Board mentor to oversee the project and member approvals without requiring an explicit +1.[3]
My last thought is to wonder if you and/or Tom Herbert are able to come to the CentOS Interlock on 9/10 of November in Paris? It might be a good chance to close a hand-off of the ecosystem relationships.
I would love to but I am booked for OVSCON on the 7th 8th and the ovs/dpdk design summit on the 10th.
Regards,
- Karsten, who was keeping notes anyway ...
Below quotes are from https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/ :
[0] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/NFV
[1] Conduct the business of the SIG following accepted open source practices around meritocracy and consensus decision making.
[2] All new committers, developers, SIG core team members, etc. must be approved by the Board.
[3] In both the Sandbox and Early SIGs, the role of the Board is primarily to facilitate the movement of those SIGs towards the Mature level; it serves as an initial gateway with the goal of getting out of the way of the SIGs.
Thanks, Dave.
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-- *Thomas F Herbert* SDN Group Office of Technology *Red Hat* _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-
Daniel Farrell -
Dave Neary -
Karsten Wade -
Thomas F Herbert