Open Stack

One of the redlines did so: v15 (current bylaws) and v18 (latest draft of proposed bylaws).  The other redline v17 (initial draft of the bylaws which was presented to the Bylaws Committee on which you commented) and v18 is the latest draft of the proposed bylaws.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark McLoughlin [mailto:markmc at redhat.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 11:21 PM
To: Radcliffe, Mark
Cc: Thierry Carrez; Eileen Evans Esq. (eileen.evans at hp.com); defcore-committee at lists.openstack.org; Roay, Leslie
Subject: Re: [OpenStack-DefCore] Revised Bylaws

Hmm, I'm not explaining myself clearly. There were two redline documents. AIUI, one showed the difference between the current bylaws and v15. The other showed the difference between v15 and v18. It would help us to see a redline rendering of the changes between the current bylaws and the latest proposed changes (i.e. v18).

Mark.

On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 00:35 +0000, Radcliffe, Mark wrote:
> Thanks. The v18 changes were cumulative.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark McLoughlin [mailto:markmc at redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 2:25 PM
> To: Radcliffe, Mark
> Cc: Thierry Carrez; Eileen Evans Esq. (eileen.evans at hp.com); 
> defcore-committee at lists.openstack.org; Roay, Leslie
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack-DefCore] Revised Bylaws
> 
> Hi Mark
> 
> What might help clear up some confusion is a Change-Pro Redline rendering of the changes between the original version and the latest proposed version.
> 
> I think the TC were really struggling with having to combine the v15 
> and
> v18 changes in their head.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mark.
> 
> On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 19:03 +0000, Radcliffe, Mark wrote:
> > I am enclosing the current version of the Bylaws marked to show differences to the existing version (v15 to v.18) and marked to show the changes to the initial revised draft (v.17 to v.18). This second set of changes reflects comments raised at the last meeting of the committee, particularly by Mark McLoughlin on behalf of the Technical Committee.  Version 18 has not yet been approved by the committee.  These changes are meant to reflect the need to move from a "module" based method of determining when the trademark can be used to a more flexible method which can be agreed upon by the Technical Committee and the Board. As I said to Mark and I think that he passed on to the Technical Committee, the reasons for the DefCore and these revisions are as follows:
> > 
> > 
> > > I appreciate your comments at the Bylaws committee meeting.  We 
> > > don't want to have the TC misunderstand the reasons for the bylaws 
> > > change or
> > 
> > > their consequences. These changes are focused solely on 
> > > determining how and when the trademark can be used.  We want to 
> > > ensure that the TC
> > 
> > > has an active role in the decisions.  Consequently, we will shift back to the use of "core" for these procedures being set up.   However, as
> > 
> > > I noted,  a number of members of DefCore Committee have expressed 
> > > a desire to use a word other than "core" for this concept so we 
> > > may see
> > 
> > > an additional change in the name .
> > 
> > Please consider the environment before printing this email.
> > 
> > The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or legally privileged. It has been sent for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender and destroy all copies of the message. To contact us directly, send to postmaster at dlapiper.com. Thank you.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Defcore-committee mailing list
> > Defcore-committee at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/defcore-committe
> > e
> 
> 
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
> 
> The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or legally privileged. It has been sent for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender and destroy all copies of the message. To contact us directly, send to postmaster at dlapiper.com. Thank you.


Please consider the environment before printing this email.

The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or legally privileged. It has been sent for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender and destroy all copies of the message. To contact us directly, send to postmaster at dlapiper.com. Thank you.