<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Thierry Carrez <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:thierry@openstack.org" target="_blank">thierry@openstack.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">FYI<br>
(forwarded at Mark Radcliffe's request)<br>
<br>
-------- Message transféré --------<br>
Sujet : Revised Bylaws<br>
Date : Sat, 15 Nov 2014 15:35:09 +0000<br>
De : Radcliffe, Mark <<a href="mailto:Mark.Radcliffe@dlapiper.com">Mark.Radcliffe@dlapiper.com</a>><br>
Pour : <a href="mailto:openstack-tc-owner@lists.openstack.org">openstack-tc-owner@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<<a href="mailto:openstack-tc-owner@lists.openstack.org">openstack-tc-owner@lists.openstack.org</a>>, Stefano Maffulli<br>
<<a href="mailto:stefano@openstack.org">stefano@openstack.org</a>><br>
Copie à : Jonathan Bryce <<a href="mailto:jonathan@openstack.org">jonathan@openstack.org</a>>, Alan Clark<br>
<<a href="mailto:aclark@suse.com">aclark@suse.com</a>><br>
<br>
This email is a follow up to the discussion at the joint Technical<br>
Committee/Board meeting at the Paris Summit. I am enclosing the final<br>
draft of the revised bylaws. As you know, the DefCore process has<br>
developed a process for managing the application of trademarks to the<br>
OpenStack Project. The original bylaws provided for very detailed (and<br>
inflexible) approach to the use of trademarks and the modification of<br>
the Core OpenStack Project. The proposed revisions are meant to provide<br>
flexibility to adopt the Defcore procedures and any changes to those<br>
procedures in the future. These changes have included input from the<br>
Legal Affairs Committee, OpenStack Foundation management and the Defcore<br>
Committee. Please provide me with any comments by noon on Thursday,<br>
November 20. We will also be sending a similar email to the Board and<br>
the Defcore Committee. The drafts can be found at<br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eztcbk8tvxouqfb/AABX8D6g8jns3Cp_4OGthc7Oa?dl=0" target="_blank">https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eztcbk8tvxouqfb/AABX8D6g8jns3Cp_4OGthc7Oa?dl=0</a><br>
<br>
After considering and incorporating any relevant comments, the<br>
Foundation is planning to have a Board meeting in the first week of<br>
December to approve the final draft. Then, such draft will be put on<br>
the Foundation website to prepare for approval by the Individual Members<br>
as part of their election of Individual Directors.<br>
<br>
1. Revisions for Determination Core and Trademark Policy.<br>
a. Shift from two to three categories of software<br>
i. Current bylaws<br>
A. OpenStack Project<br>
B. Core OpenStack Project<br>
ii.Revised bylaws<br>
A. OpenStack Project<br>
B. OpenStack TC Approved Release<br>
C. Trademark Designated OpenStack Software<br>
b. Change in determination of Trademark Designated OpenStack Software<br>
by the Board<br>
i. Current bylaws<br>
A. Modules: Block Storage, Compute, Dashboard, Identity<br>
Service, Image Service, Networking, and Object Storage<br>
B. Add/Remove Modules Process: Proposed by Technical Committee<br>
and approved by the Board of Directors ("Board")<br>
C. This provision can only be changed by a vote of the Board<br>
and the affirmative vote of (i) two-thirds of the Gold Members, (ii)<br>
two-thirds of the Platinum Members, and (iii) a majority of the<br>
Individual Members voting (but only if at least 25% of the Individual<br>
Members voting at an annual or special<br>
meeting).<br>
ii. Revised bylaws<br>
A. Trademark Designated OpenStack Software: Process for<br>
determining Trademark Designated OpenStack Software will be determined<br>
by the Board and does not need any vote by the members, but changes in<br>
process require Technical Committee approval (i.e. change from DefCore)<br>
B. OpenStack TC Approved Release (formerly Integrated<br>
Release): Determined by Technical Committee but "Trademark Designated<br>
OpenStack Software" can be deleted from OpenStack TC Approved Release<br>
only with permission of Board<br>
c. Change in management of trademarks<br>
i. Current bylaws<br>
A. Trademarks governed by detailed trademark policy in Appendix 8<br>
B. This provision can only be changed by a vote of the Board<br>
and the affirmative vote of (i) two-thirds of the Gold Members, (ii)<br>
two-thirds of the Platinum Members, and (iii) a majority of the<br>
Individual Members voting (but only if at least 25% of the Individual<br>
Members vote at an annual or special meeting).<br>
ii. Revised bylaws<br>
A. Trademarks will be governed by a trademark policy to be<br>
determined by the Board and does not need any vote by the members<br>
<br>
2. Determination of ATC<br>
a. Current bylaws: ATC must contribute to Core OpenStack Project.<br>
b. Revised bylaws: ATC must contribute to OpenStack Project .<br>
<br>
<br>
Separate Approval (at the request of DefCore)<br>
<br>
1. Legal Affairs Committee<br>
a. Current bylaws: Legal Affairs Committee currently is limited to<br>
five members (but eleven lawyers are attending).<br>
b. Revised bylaws: The Board can set the criteria for membership on<br>
the Legal Affairs Committee.<br>
<br>
2. Quorum for Individual Members to Amend the Bylaws<br>
a. Current bylaws: A majority of the Individual Members voting (but<br>
only if at least 25% of the Individual Members vote at an annual or<br>
special meeting). This vote was selected rather arbitrarily at the<br>
time the bylaws were drafted and did not anticipate the number of<br>
Individual Members which have joined the Foundation. The 2014 election<br>
for Individual Directors had participation of only [11%] of the<br>
Individual Members.<br>
b. Revised bylaws: A majority of the Individual Members voting (but<br>
only if at least 10% of the Individual Members vote at an annual or<br>
special meeting).</blockquote><div><br></div><div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">* While I agree with problem this is trying to fix, dropping the bar for voter turnout to 10% doesn't seem like a great solution. But I don't have a better idea.</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">* In the changes to 7.1.b: "The Foundation shall distribute the software in the OpenStack TC </div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Approved Release under the Apache License 2.0 unless changed as provided in Section 9.1" So the OpenStack Project (superset of TC approved release that is also governed by the TC) can include not Apache 2 things?</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">* In 9.2.d: Why omit 4.13.b from the list of sections that require a special vote? because its related to the trademark? But this is also one of the sections that says what power the TC has: "The Technical Committee shall have the authority to manage the </div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">OpenStack Project, including the authority to determine the scope of the OpenStack TC </div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Approved Release subject to the procedures set forth below. "</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">* When removing appendix 8, you are removing the explicit guarantee that the OpenStack Word Mark is shared with the community. While I fully support making it easier to adjust the commercial trademark usage, I am not very keen on making it easier to change the guarantee that the non-commercial trademark usage.</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">"We share the OpenStack Word Mark with the community for the purposes of open source </div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">discussion, development and support of the OpenStack project and technology. We understand </div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">that such use is mostly for non-commercial purposes and therefore we will allow the use of the </div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">OpenStack Word Mark, without a license, when used in a “referential” phrase only to describe </div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">the OpenStack Project or the OpenStack code base, provided you comply with the following </div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">requirements:"</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">* Appendix 4 Section 3. To play devils advocate here, if the TC goes down the 'big tent small core' model where the TC is only really actively providing direct support for a small core while making space for many other projects in the OpenStack tent, does it make sense to have everyone in the big tent vote in TC elections even if the TC has no impact on their projects? For example if the TC is mostly focusing on nova/cinder/neutron/etc and is just providing a space for project foobar but does not interact with foobar developers or the foobar developers in any meaningful way should foobar developers vote in TC elections, even though the TC doesn't represent them? </div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
<br>
Please consider the environment before printing this email.<br>
<br>
The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or<br>
legally privileged. It has been sent for the sole use of the intended<br>
recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not an intended<br>
recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use,<br>
disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this<br>
communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you<br>
have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender<br>
and destroy all copies of the message. To contact us directly, send to<br>
<a href="mailto:postmaster@dlapiper.com">postmaster@dlapiper.com</a>. Thank you.<br>
---------------------------<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-TC mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-TC@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>