From: Ed Warnicke Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:53:16 +0000 (-0500) Subject: Add technical governance timeline X-Git-Url: https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/gitweb?a=commitdiff_plain;h=d79d01c8ec3fb2c5620b736951a8e3ba8be938fc;p=lfn%2Fprocess.git Add technical governance timeline Recommendation to the Board regarding the timeline for completion of the technical governance for LFN by the TAC. Change-Id: I53bbf331fd124e77c5d20d3737a9f93be28f3b36 Signed-off-by: Ed Warnicke Signed-off-by: Daniel Farrell --- diff --git a/recommendations/technical_governance_timeline/recommendation.txt b/recommendations/technical_governance_timeline/recommendation.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f42bd42 --- /dev/null +++ b/recommendations/technical_governance_timeline/recommendation.txt @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +The TAC acknowledges and accepts the Board's request for a May 4 completion +date on technical governance. Unfortunately, such an ambitious date is +incompatible with drafting the quality governance we are certain the Board is +requesting for the new umbrella-of-umbrella’s situation we find ourselves in. + +In an attempt to meet the Board's request, drafting has been proceeding in +earnest, resulting thus far in documenting of a first draft statement of +principles to guide us [0], a first draft general framework to set the stage +[1], and an incomplete project lifecycle [2]. None of these has achieved full +consensus nor is complete at this time. Neither have these three efforts been +harmonized into a coherent whole. Once we have a fairly presentable set of +proposals, we need to bring them to the LFN communities to solicit additional +feedback and build community buy-in. We are making good progress, but have much +yet to do. See the TODOs inline for details about what still needs to be done. + +Had we anticipated that the Board would augment our previous recommendation by +attaching a deadline, we would have provided the baselining from other +communities we provide here. + +OpenDaylight's drafting of technical governance took nine weeks, including an +intensive F2F meeting. FD.io's took 5 weeks including a F2F meeting. ONAP's +took 5 weeks including a F2F meeting. Both ONAP and FD.io benefited from +being able to start from the OpenDaylight governance, as their structures were +similar. + +LFN's structure is new and novel and so we expect it to be an effort closer to +that of the OpenDaylight drafting, but without the benefit of a F2F. As such +we request the Board extend its deadline to be July 11th from the receipt by +the TAC of its response to this recommendation to allow for the drafting of +quality technical governance for LFN. + +[0]: https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/10223/ +[1]: https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/10103/ +[2]: https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/10221/