| Re: [science-iwg] [science-sc] [science-pmc] Retiring the Science Working Group |
All:
Thank you for the discussion and conclusion you reached here on the various mailing lists to retire the Science Working Group.
It has always been the Eclipse Foundation’s expectation that some Working Groups will exist for a period of time to accomplish a specific set of objectives consistent with their vision and scope, and at some point may no longer be in a position to pursue the original goals as a working group, and is deemed inactive. As per the Steering Committee’s recommendation, and consistent with the Eclipse Foundation Working Group Process [1], I will seek the Executive Director’s approval to formally wrap up the Science Working Group effective immediately. Upon receipt of that final approval, all materials relevant to the working group will be updated to indicate the working group is no longer active; these assets generally remain viewable.
We want to emphasize that any projects that have been under the purview of the Science working group remain active; the termination of the working group has no impact whatsoever on the projects, their viability, etc. We encourage all those interested in the working group to continue to follow the related projects. With respect to the PMC and TLP, this is a topic that our EMO team (copied) can provide assistance with and can discuss further on those related mailing lists.
On behalf of the Eclipse Foundation, thank you to everyone in the Science community for the work accomplished and the collaboration seen.
Please feel free to contact the undersigned should you have any questions.
[1] https://www.eclipse.org/org/workinggroups/process.php
Hello every one, It was great to be part of it ( even with my small project ) . A lot of ideas , a lot of cleverness .._______________________________________________Christopher, you beat me with the mythical destination beach .I remember going to a geocache with one of you .. near Washington .. Amazing ..Every one, have beautiful and calm beach and big fish .BrigitteLe 30 oct. 2022 à 16:48, Christopher Brooks <cxbrooks@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :_______________________________________________Writing as perhaps the only retired person on this list, I warmly accept the Science Working Group joining me in retirement! I'll happily buy the SWG an early afternoon drink with an umbrella the next time I see the SWG on the beach in the mythical retirement tropical destination beach of my mind.
More seriously, things come, things go. As a project manager I've been told that the stages of a project are forming, storming, norming, performing and mourning.
Put a fork in it, it is done!
Matt beat me to it about the fish...
_Christopher
On 10/28/22 4:37 PM, Matthew Gerring wrote:
Yes for me it became bureaucracy for no purpose but i shall remember the meetings and ideas for collaborations fondly. Particularly the visits to Trondheim the marine research institute, Tennessee the Oak Ridge Lab and the airplane factory in Toulouse.
So long and thanks for all the fish.
Matt
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022, 16:48 Torkild U. Resheim, <torkildr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thanks Jay,
> 28. okt. 2022 kl. 22:09 skrev Jay Jay Billings <jayjaybillings@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
> Torkild,
>
> I've been waiting for a long time now for you to nominate me to the SC since we updated the charter and committer-members can take on SC roles, but they can only be nominated by current SC members. I probably should have synced up with you about this. Or did we do this and I just forgot about it?
I think I somehow overlooked that opportunity to nominate you. My apologies. Even so, it would take more than the two of us to make a Working Group serve its purpose. My day job no longer allows this effort. So for my part it would be on my spare time.
>
> But, I don't think it matters now and it is clearly an indicator of how low our activity has been. I believe that you are correct to make a motion that we should retire the working group. Please allow me to follow suit with Philip and second that motion. We can sync up with EF to figure out the next steps.
>
> I am also concerned that the PMC and TLP are defunct. After taking over as PMC chair, I emailed the list several times to ask for project leads to join a meeting and I think Philip was the only person to respond. I believe that we should ask the EMO for guidance on this and make moves to adjust membership and retire projects as needed.
Yes, even if we do retire the Working Group. I don’t feel like much is lost. Many enough of us are still around to keep at least some of the projects going. So I agree we should focus on getting the PMC working in a good manner. If opportunity arises to do more, we can. Retiring the Working Group is simply good bookkeeping.
I do support asking the EMO for guidance. But as you may remember, this process is already in work. TeXlipse for example was about to be retired just recently.
>
> If anyone wants to throw tomatoes at me, please do: They are one of my favorite fruits!
I’m not growing tomatoes, but I do have a five Trinidad Naga Scorpion, and one Scottish Black Bonnet bushes thriving. I might throw something, but I fear you will like it too much ;-)
>
> Jay
Missed you at EclipseCon. Maybe next time Jay,
Torkild
_______________________________________________
science-iwg mailing list
science-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-iwg
_______________________________________________ science-iwg mailing list science-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-iwg
science-iwg mailing list
science-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-iwg
science-iwg mailing list
science-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-iwg