[ClusterLabs Developers] OCF under the Linux Foundation?

[Andrew Beekhof]

I’d just be cautious about giving them the keys to anything.
It took many months for them to bring their bugzilla instance back online and we lost many years of bug data.

Another consideration, between ourselves we can make decisions pretty constructively and quickly… is a layer of red tape (slow) over that going to be beneficial?

> On 16 Aug 2016, at 3:05 AM, Digimer <lists at alteeve.ca> wrote:
> 
> My take at this point is this;
> 
> We're a small group, all things considered, and we're all working fairly
> well together at this time. We've all got our particular focus and, so
> far as I have seen (and I admit to not seeing a whole lot), coordinating
> between projects is going fine.
> 
> So my question is;
> 
> The overhead of a more official organization, charter, etc comes at a
> time cost. What do we get out of it? If the benefits outweigh the time
> costs, sure. Otherwise, I think we're fine staying under the Clusterlabs
> umbrella for the time being.
> 
> Again, I know my view of HA is hardly complete, so this is just my take
> on it.
> 
> digimer
> 
> On 15/08/16 12:34 PM, Ken Gaillot wrote:
>> I got a response from the Linux Foundation regarding the OCF name. They
>> are willing to host a working group if we want a neutral home for it. He
>> didn't explicitly address the question, but I believe the LF would have
>> no objections to ClusterLabs taking over the OCF name if we don't want
>> to go that route.
>> 
>> I've attached the sample charter he mentioned in case anyone wants to
>> see it. We wouldn't have to set up identically but it's a reference point.
>> 
>> I think the naming conflicts he mentions are not serious, because (1)
>> our usage predates either of those, and (2) there are even more existing
>> computer-related uses of the OCF acronym (see
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OCF ... Open Computing Facility,
>> OpenBSD/FreeBSD Cryptographic Framework, OpenCard Framework, Original
>> Composite Font).
>> 
>> How does everyone feel about this? Should we host the OCF standards
>> under the Linux Foundation, for greater reach and authority, and clear
>> neutrality? Or should we bring it under ClusterLabs, to keep everything
>> as simple as possible (and perhaps emphasize support for OSes beyond Linux)?
>> 
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: 	Re: Open Cluster Framework
>> Date: 	Mon, 15 Aug 2016 12:12:46 -0400
>> From: 	Michael Dolan <mdolan at linuxfoundation.org>
>> To: 	kgaillot at redhat.com
>> CC: 	Mike Woster <mwoster at linuxfoundation.org>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi Ken, is this something you would prefer to have at the LF? We could
>> setup a lightweight governance model and let the community drive all the
>> decisions under a working group model under the LF. We just announced a
>> similar structure for Open vSwitch and would be amenable to hosting this
>> similarly. I'm pasting the governance documents here so you can see what
>> that looked like. They didn't want any membership levels or fees so it's
>> just a technical collaboration effort and very lightweight. However
>> giving it a home at the LF allowed them to neutralize any arguments the
>> project was under the control of any one company. They assigned the
>> domain and trademark rights to the LF to make it neutral.
>> 
>> I will point out there are a few "OCF" standards out there now that are
>> already in naming conflict. First there was the "Open Container Format"
>> or "OCF Certified" by the Open Container Initiative we host. They
>> already filed for a registered trademark. They standardized the Docker
>> container format for broader industry use.
>> 
>> The other is the Open Connectivity Foundation which is a standards body.
>> That one is not directly affiliated with the LF, but we host the
>> IoTivity open source project they sponsor so we're aware of their
>> activities. They have an OCF brand I believe they were planning to use
>> for IoT devices that implement their specification standard.
>> 
>> I'd be happy to jump on a call if it would be easier to discuss live.
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> Mike Dolan
>> VP of Strategic Programs
>> The Linux Foundation
>> Office: +1.330.460.3250   Cell: +1.440.552.5322  Skype: michaelkdolan
>> mdolan at linuxfoundation.org <mailto:mdolan at linuxfoundation.org>
>> ---
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Developers mailing list
>> Developers at clusterlabs.org
>> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Digimer
> Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
> What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
> access to education?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> Developers at clusterlabs.org
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/developers