=============================================================

Minutes TAB call (August 12, 2016)

=============================================================

Info

Time: 2pmET

Dial:

Host confcall: OASIS

US Toll Free: +1 641 715-3822

Chat room: http://webconf.soaphub.org/conf/room/tab

Agenda

1) Roll call

2) Approval of agenda

3) Approval of minutes August 5: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tab/email/archives/201608/msg00008.html

4) Status of public reviews

No first public reviews open at this time

5) Status of open action items - AI: Patrick - merge proposed Conformance Clause edits with current working draft & send to Ashok

- AI: Chet: summarize what ideas we had on things the TAB could do on Ligers?

6) Discuss ideas for supporting the Open Project (Liger) initiative

7) Approve 2016/2017 work plan

8) AOB

Minutes

1) Attending: Ashok, Chet, Jacques, Kevin, Patrick

2) Agenda

No discussion of agenda. No objections to approval. Agenda approved.

3) Approval of minutes 05 August 2016

No discussion of minutes. No objections to approval. Minutes approved.

4) Status of public reviews

No first reviews open now. None on the immediate horizaon.

5) Status of open action items

- AI: Patrick - merge proposed Conformance Clause edits with current working draft & send to Ashok
Still open.

- AI: Chet: summarize what ideas we had on things the TAB could do on Ligers?
Chet covered during meeting. Closed

6) Discuss ideas for supporting the Open Project (Liger) initiative

Chet recapped ideas so far. Discussion of topic generally followed.

Jacques suggests that OASIS should offer open source in the context of developing standards: code management / sample implementations that help in adoption of a specification; test suites and test code; managing the standardization process in an open source manner (i.e. if we could manage spec documentation in Github that might change how the process works).

Patrick noted that creating a hybrid that partly adopts open source principles but also retains elements of the TCP probably isn't going to be attractive to anyone.

Jacques noted that presenting OASIS as a de facto open source shop and competing directly with the other organizations will be challenging. Other orgs have existing ecosystems that people are drawn to join. Presenting it in the context a path to standardization (or some other form of normative standing perhaps) could be more fruitful.

Patrick also more sympathetic to OASIS having an open src model that is the first stage towards standardization. If the work happens under a model that enables open source but also has everything sorted out for moving that work to standard standing, that's better than presenting a model that is a "cross-over." Gave the example of SOLR (http://lucene.apache.org/solr/ - Apache project). What if they saw a value in standardization and wanted to come to OASIS. Could they move their well-tested, well-reviewed, well-exercised code to some approval at OASIS without having to jump through all the hoops of the TC Process?

Notes that having a way to some kind of standing without having to start from scratch might be attractive to other groups as well.

Ashok notes the risk of someone bringing a self-serving spec to OASIS and trying to make it a standard without going through any of the steps. That has happened before.

Jacques says that the key thing is let's not publicly position ourselves as in competition with other open source shops. The OASIS position presented to the world should be that this is about linking open source with standardization - an integration position, not a competitive one.

That is a value proposition of OASIS that other orgs can't offer.

Chet asked about writing this up as initial feedback. Just a short memo.

Patrick notes that Apache could be a good source for that sort of project. The OASIS Process would be more friendly towards Apache projects.

Jaques took an AI to draft a rough first pass memo for next Friday.

7) Approve 2016/2017 work plan

Tabled until next meeting.

8) AOB

No other business raised. Meeting closed.

Next meeting is 19 August 2016, 2:00 PM EDT

Minutes respectfully submitted by Chet Ensign, 16 August 2016.

Chat log

Chet: Attending: Ashok, Kevin, Patrick, Chet
Chet: Agenda: no disc, no obj, agenda approved
Chet: Minutes: no disc, no objs, minutes approved
Chet: Status of public reviews
Chet: None open
Chet: Not expecting any reviews next 2 weeks
Chet: - AI: Patrick - merge proposed Conformance Clause edits with current working draft & send to Ashok
Chet: Still open
Chet: P: has anyone used the online versions of online version of Office tools? A: yes. K: I've used Office365 & it is ok.
Chet: K: it's not bad. I prefer the desktop version but nothing wrong with online.
Chet: Jacques joins.
Chet: If Chet is going to keep working in docx ...
Chet: - AI: Chet: summarize what ideas we had on things the TAB could do on Ligers?
Chet: Present at this call. Closed.
Chet: 6) Discuss ideas for supporting the Open Project (Liger) initiative
Chet: Ideas for how TAB can help with LIGER project

- TAB acts as a test customer looking for a project home in order to compare OASIS offering with other forums like Linux Foundation, Apache, Eclipse

- TAB could comment on/build on the service/process matrix to bring into focus what is different from TC Process

- TAB could articulate how a code product might cross over into the standards track workflow

Q: What are the issues we need to consider between code and documentation? How are other organizations (i.e. W3C) handling those differences?
Chet: Chet recaps the items and asks for feedback.
Chet: Jacques: good start. several aspects - good to sort out what are the different features / options for operating in this hybrid mode.
Chet: J: we want OASIS to offer code management: reference implementations or sample implementations - that can help in the implementation of a standard. Right now, TC members may do their own development off to the side but that doesn't help the standard be developed.
Chet: J: next is test suites. members get together and contribute test code.
Chet: J: The other aspect is the management of the standardization process in an open source manner. There is the tooling itself. The other is how will that effect the process.
Chet: J: then there is the process itself - there is the review process which is a pain. If we could manage spec documentation in Github that might affect how the process works.
Chet: P: I'm not sure about comment that 'how does code product cross over to a standards track'
Chet: P: concern is if we try to reform the current TCP in some kind of hybrid way that partly adopts open source principles but also retains the TCP probably come up with something that isn't going to be attractive to anyone.
Chet: P: if we're going to adopt open source projects - let's go ahead and take the leap. But not make distinctions between codes and standards. This seems to be what the board wants to do.
Chet: Chet: explains what I meant by that was how can a Liger project take some of their work and move it over into standards track work flow
Chet: J: yes, we would like to see open src result in standards work if we could.
Chet: J: you're saying OASIS could indeed become a de facto open source shop whether they intended to go to standard or not. I'd warn that it is not that easy to reinvent yourself this way. The cross-over model might be attractive but that won't generally be appealing to new open source projects. Other orgs have an existing ecosystem that people are drawn to join.
Chet: J: the cross-over model must provide a path to standardization. That could be more fruitful.
Chet: J: I'm a bit skeptical of the cross-over model. I'd thought the idea that standardization was still the main interest from the start. I.e. Agile standardization.
Chet: P: More sympathetic to OASIS having an open src model that is the first stage towards standardization.
Chet: P: If it happens under a process that already has everything sorted out, that's better than a cross-over.
Chet: P: what if Solar wanted to come to OASIS - seeing value in having it in standard
Chet: P: so they come in but they don't want to see it go through all the hoops for TCP
Chet: SOLR
Chet: P: then they can get on gov't procurement lists and such
Chet: P: I don't see a downside for having different ways of starting a project. It can just start with writing code. But make it all apples - to - apples with well defined entry points.
Chet: P: this could also help with bringing existing specifications into OASIS - have OASIS facilitate their entry into the work flow
Chet: A: what happens if someone has a self-serving spec and they bring it to OASIS and want to just make it a standard without going through any of the steps. That has happened before.
Chet: P: sure but the OASIS membership could vote and if it is a self-serving standard, they could vote against it.
Chet: P: agree - it is a danger but as in any democracy, people are free to be stupid.
Chet: J: on Ashok's concern - could avoid the rubber-stamping by requiring creation of a TC and having other folks join, must be some voting by the members to advance
Chet: J: re Patrick comment about open way to get to standard, whether by open src that cross-over or whatever -- but let's not position ourselves as in competition with other open source shops.
Chet: J: OASIS should keep the position that this is about linking open source with standardization - an integration position, not a competitive position
Chet: J: that is a value proposition of OASIS - other orgs can't offer that.
Chet: J: it would take them time to ramp up to that.
Chet: A: pls clarify what you meant by OASIS wouldn't be able to offer what the other orgs have
Chet: J: OASIS may be able to offer equal service over time but these are big, experienced communitities.
Chet: J: start low key - emphasize that open src projects calling themselves de facto standards don't have that standing really
Chet: J: the card we should play is synergy and integration
Chet: J: as OASIS builds experience & communitiies this coudl change
Chet: Chet: question - should we try to write this up and summarize what Jacques has said to send to Laurent as initial feedback
Chet: C: just a short memo / position statement / suggestions from the TAB to Laurent
Chet: J: far from competing with them, we ought to look at them as partners
Chet: J: offer the OASIS process as a synergy to complement existing projects
Chet: P: would you go so far as to suggest that we point them towards a open src entity e.g. Apache and then, if you want to standardize, we have a defined process for bringing it into the flow
Chet: ?
Chet: C: so how would OASIS make a living if we sent projects to 'partners'?
Chet: J: no, not suggesting that we sent projects elsewhere. Just saying that we should position open src differently - as an incubator to standardization projects or as a compliment to standardization work
Patrick: Possibly from existing members of say Apache who need the standards stamp for government procurement reasons - a larger pool than new project
Patrick: Or if not recommending, then mining those projects anyway
Chet: J: OASIS should still offer an open source capaibility - but it will not replace other professional open rc projects
Chet: @P: interesting thought...
Patrick: b/c TC Process would be more friendly towards Apache projects
Chet: Hmmm.... good observation
Chet: J: Open src should be presumed to be a step on a path towards standardization
Chet: J: we should position ourselves as offering different value proposition on the open src spectrum
Chet: J: how can we offer a standardization process that would neatly piggyback on the open src development process
Chet: A: Jacques you are recommending that an open src project should only think about joining Oasis if they want to go on a standardization track. But would we not want to be open to prjs that only care about the code
Chet: J: well, we could make that low key - but I would advertise open src as llinked to standardization
Chet: J: just wouldn't want to position ourselves as competing with the other orgs
Chet: AI to Jacques to draft a rough first pass memo for next Friday.
Sent transcript to: chet.ensign@oasis-open.org

20160817 (last edited 2016-08-16 21:39:57 by chet.ensign)