Re: OpenChain spec v0.1
Yes, and while I’m not sure if this belongs as part of purpose or somewhere else, as a comment on a desired future state – the way different companies will have implemented their OSS management is sufficiently consistent with a normative process standard (OpenChain!) to allow the upstream diligence effort to be potentially more useful to downstream recipients.
IMO this is a key value driver -- being a good community citizen; while also getting cost savings; while also reducing time-to-market; while also achieving risk reduction.
Yes, we need to capture some of these points in a pitch deck to help folks on this list to get buy-in from their internal stakeholders. Think I’m the stuckee for that deck which probably explains why it’s not done yet.
BTW we had terrific traction at the F2F (thanks to Kate), looking forward to the recap at our next call.
From: Jilayne Lovejoy [mailto:Jilayne.Lovejoy@...]
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 3:09 PM
To: Marr, David; Sami Atabani; openchain@...; Williams, Kelly
Subject: Re: [OpenChain] OpenChain spec v0.1
I think the “purpose” of OpenChain is to establish best practices / guidelines / roadmap (whatever we call it) that supports achieving the goals for the effective management of OSS. Those goals being, in sum: <insert Sami’s text>
This all reminds me - are we supposed to come with a “mission statement” and “purpose” or “vision” or some other such corporate internal marketing–speak, which I’m never quite good at… and never quite sure of the distinction between…
I suppose, if I were to take a stab and extend the purpose and goals of OpenChain to what our vision would be (vision = the OpenChain vision of the future!!) it might be:
Oh my… must stop typing now…
My impression is that this seems to be a very good capture of our purpose. Dave
Unfortunately, I won’t be able to join the next session on Monday due to travel commitment but would be happy for this to be discussed during my absence or delayed for next time.
My thoughts are captured below and can be used as the basis for defining the purpose:
I hope this will be useful.
One thought occurred to me while looking at the clean document and was planning to raise during our next session is to have a summary of our initiative at the top of the document to capture the purpose. Perhaps this is something that we can add to our agenda for next time?
We’ve done the first pass on cleaning up the spec in particular changing the language to imperative language. Version 0.1 is now posted on the Etherpad (https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/openchain) and the original spec is archived on the wiki.
Let me know if you have any questions regarding the scope of the clean-up.