| Re: [iot-wg] Re-start Eclipse IoT WG Steering Committee |
Kai, Thank you for the edits and the feedback.
However, there are also some issues that I would like to discuss on this list and in our meeting tomorrow: 1. The section on the Steering Committee Roles and Responsibilities defines several responsibilities around "approving" results created by the IoT Working Group such as - "technical architecture and composition of any Eclipse IoT solution stack". - "Eclipse IoT Testbeds" - "any Eclipse IoT documents, include technical architectures, blueprints, white papers" I would really like to better understand what the term "approval" actually implies in this context. As stated before, I am a little afraid that the people who do the actual work creating these artifacts will no longer be in charge of agreeing on what should be done and how it should look like. My understanding of the steering committee members is still very poor so at least I am in need of some clarification here. >>>> To be clear, each individual project determines their own roadmap and project plans. The committers and project leaders continue to make these decisions. However as the Eclipse IoT community grows, we need to have a decision process on artifacts that go across projects. For example, the white paper that Benjamin and I wrote. If these artifacts are representing the entire community, then I believe we need a decision making process that represents the key stakeholders involved in the community. I don’t think the fact someone does the work to create an artifact for the Eclipse IoT community, means that it needs to be accepted to represent the entire community. Right now, we don’t have this type of decision making process. At best, it is probably Benjamin and myself that make these decisions, which is not a good thing. J >>> Regarding steering committee members, the companies that have expressed an interest in participating in the steering committee and their representatives are Red Hat (James Kirkland), Bosch (Stefan Ferber) and Eurotech (Marco Carrer). I am hoping other companies will also join in the future. 2. What is the role and responsibility of the "chair" of the IoT Working Group? Is that just a "formal" role required by the inner workings of the foundation? >>> Right now, I act as the chair of the Working Group meeting. I put together an agenda and run the meetings. In an ideal world, a community member would be taking on this role so a process of selecting a chair needs to be in place. FWIW, I don’t mind continuing in the role as chair so I don’t expect this to be a change. It is included here so in the future we do have a process for selecting a chair. 3. My understanding is that a "Steering Committee Member" will usually be an organization. That organization is supposed to provide "executive level representation" at the quarterly steering committee meetings.Is there any need for the organizations to be represented in their role as steering committee members in between the quarterly meetings? Put another way: are the quarterly meetings the only occasion on which the steering committee actually decides on anything or puts things in motion? >>> This will be up to the steering committee. The quarterly meetings is expected to be the minimum number of meetings. Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards From: iot-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <iot-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Ian Skerrett <ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx> All, As a follow-up to our conversation about the IoT Steering Committee, I have created an draft version of an updated charter for the Eclipse IoT Working Group. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y-_jF2LqrEvS1EqgdQk2Rgf8FtywVSz8oWQiROL8LvE/edit?usp=sharing We can talk about this draft during our call tomorrow but feel free to send comments and questions on this mailing list. Thanks Ian From: iot-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:iot-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ian Skerrett All, I would like to propose that we re-start the Eclipse IoT Working Group Steering Committee. The initial working group charter [1] includes a Steering Committee but in the last number of years this committee has not been operational. Re-starting the steering committee will be the first step to defining a governance model to create more successful collaborations within the working group. Over the last number of years our working group has grown to become a significant provider of technology to the IoT industry. As more and more companies and projects join, we need to make it clear how decisions will be made that span projects and organizations. We also see the steering committee helping to better coordinate resources across the community. To start this discussion, I have created a document [2] to describe the role of the steering committee and the criteria to join the steering committee. Representatives from Red Hat, Bosch and Eurotech have reviewed and commented on the document and these companies have agreed to participate in the new steering committee. At the next IoT WG meeting, I would like to review the document and collect feedback from the working group. In parallel, I will begin to update the existing Eclipse IoT WG charter to reflect the new steering committee. I will also take the opportunity to update some of the terminology in the charter to remove the M2M references. Please let me know if you have any questions or feedback. We can certainly talk about the details during the meeting tomorrow. Ian [1] Eclipse IoT Charter https://www.eclipse.org/org/workinggroups/m2miwg_charter.php [2] Steering Committee Roles https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jBYPe1bojxvX3aka2fKk1FAGfmghIV284NK4ttiWucw/edit?usp=sharing |