Re: [open-regulatory-compliance] Changing the name of “Steward” member c

[Joe Murray <joe.murray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Gaël,

Thanks for the meeting yesterday and the offer to investigate whether CiviCRM could be given a donation in the value of a membership in the Eclipse Foundation so that CiviCRM could become a member. Josh Gowans, Project Manager of CiviCRM, has indicated that he is comfortable with this approach so long it would not preclude CiviCRM from joining a different open source foundation as a project. The project's donation page is accessible from https://civicrm.org/support-us . This arrangement is to facilitate CiviCRM's participation in the Open Regulatory Compliance Working Group in its initial working on compliance with the CRA.

We were happy to see in this email from you that 'We think changing the name to be clearer in its intent that code-hosting open source software foundations, or simply “Foundation” for short, will avoid this confusion both initially and longer term. ' This seemed to suggest that CiviCRM as a code-hosting open source organization would qualify under this new terminology. So we were disappointed to still see the problematic language excluding us in proposed Charter: "Foundation Members are organisations that are recognised not-for-profits in their country of registration and host open source software projects made available under an OSI-approved licence(s)" (p. 4 of  Draft INTERNAL Open Regulatory Compliance Working Group Charter). 

Could you clarify what type of membership you envision for CiviCRM regarding our participation in the Open Regulatory Compliance Working Group? 

On a minor copy-editing point, I think the intent of the Simple Majority section's first sentence (p. 9) is best written as 'Excepting the actions specified below...' rather than 'Accepting the actions specified below...'.

 
Joe Murray, PhD (he/him)

President, JMA Consulting
416.466.1281

We respectfully acknowledge the autonomy of Indigenous peoples, and that JMA Consulting is located on the traditional territory of many nations including the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat peoples which is now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. We also acknowledge that Toronto is covered by Treaty 13 with the Mississaugas of the Credit.

On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 10:19 PM Gael Blondelle via open-regulatory-compliance <open-regulatory-compliance@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear all, 

While we appreciate all the feedback received this far, we wanted to immediately address one element of the feedback received thus far with respect to the draft charter regarding the use of the term “Steward member”. 

First, some background. As was made clear from the original announcement about forming this initiative, not-for-profit code hosting open source software foundations were the first to step forward to initiate the process, and are committed to play a significant role in the development of these open specifications. That is, these foundations are looking to work with industry and government in developing pragmatic solutions that can ultimately be adopted by the applicable standards organisations. In recognition of this commitment, we want to ensure these foundations have an active role in the governance as well as the technical work.

We originally chose the term “Steward member” to represent this class of membership for a variety of reasons, but the feedback has shown that it may be unnecessarily confusing. To summarise the possible confusion, the CRA describes the notion of steward as a new economic actor but does not fully define it, and thus who qualifies to be a steward. Indeed, sorting out which organisations ultimately are or are not stewards is outside the scope of the initiative represented by this working group, and having a class of membership that might exclude some organisations that are stewards is unhelpful, and was unintentional. We think changing the name to be clearer in its intent that code-hosting open source software foundations, or simply “Foundation” for short, will avoid this confusion both initially and longer term. We thank you for this feedback.

We have gone ahead and updated the charter and the Working Group Participation Agreement (WGPA) to reflect this change (please see attached as we work to get these posted in the next day). We have done this as the WGPA is a legal agreement, and as such having it reflect our intended go forward is worth doing in advance. We will also capture this change in the FAQ which we will be posting shortly.

There may be other modifications that can and should be made to the charter based on other feedback given (and keep it coming). As a reminder, the initial charter will be approved by the steering committee of the working group and will include whatever modifications they accept. This committee will be formed by the organisations that join as members (with their representation described in the charter). Our expectation is the first steering committee meeting will be scheduled in July. More details on this first meeting will be posted on the mailing list as the time draws nearer. 

We hope this change is helpful and our taking this action is agreeable to most.

Cheers,

-- 

Gaël Blondelle

Chief Membership Officer | Eclipse Foundation AISBL

P: +33 (0) 6 73 39 21 85 | Twitter | LinkedIn

Rond Point Schuman 11 - Brussels 1040 - Belgium

_______________________________________________
open-regulatory-compliance mailing list
open-regulatory-compliance@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://accounts.eclipse.org