Skip to main content

Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.

Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "RT/meetings/PMC Minutes 100714"

< RT‎ | meetings
(Agenda)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Attendees ==
 
== Attendees ==
 +
 +
* Tom W.
 +
* Mark R.
 +
* Glyn N.
 +
* Mike K.
 +
* Markus K.
 +
* Jeff M.
  
 
== Agenda  ==
 
== Agenda  ==
Line 6: Line 13:
 
** Suggest we use a wiki page for PMC members to list implemented specifications.
 
** Suggest we use a wiki page for PMC members to list implemented specifications.
 
* Discuss improvements to the process of CQ approval by PMC
 
* Discuss improvements to the process of CQ approval by PMC
 +
  
 
== Notes ==
 
== Notes ==
 +
 +
=== Specification Licenses ===
 +
 +
* Mike K. - action item to talk to legal about what they think is the best approach.
 +
** A wiki may be good from a public point of view and is good information for the community
 +
** A CQ may be needed from IP teams POV to get a record of approval.
 +
 +
=== Improvements to CQ process ===
 +
 +
* Is a meeting needed to clear them out?
 +
* Is it better to assign to a person instead of put it out to a group?
 +
* Jeff suggests more PMC members jump in to approve CQs.
 +
* Glyn meeting about SVT dependencies with IP team tomorrow.
 +
* Glyn to go locate the thread and put it in the appropriate CQs.
 +
* Document a decision tree that CQ submitters use to answer questions when opening a CQ
 +
** PMC members +1 when they agree with the submitters answers.

Latest revision as of 10:01, 14 July 2010

Attendees

  • Tom W.
  • Mark R.
  • Glyn N.
  • Mike K.
  • Markus K.
  • Jeff M.

Agenda

  • Revisit the specification License discussion from the May 5, 2010 meeting
    • Suggest we use a wiki page for PMC members to list implemented specifications.
  • Discuss improvements to the process of CQ approval by PMC


Notes

Specification Licenses

  • Mike K. - action item to talk to legal about what they think is the best approach.
    • A wiki may be good from a public point of view and is good information for the community
    • A CQ may be needed from IP teams POV to get a record of approval.

Improvements to CQ process

  • Is a meeting needed to clear them out?
  • Is it better to assign to a person instead of put it out to a group?
  • Jeff suggests more PMC members jump in to approve CQs.
  • Glyn meeting about SVT dependencies with IP team tomorrow.
  • Glyn to go locate the thread and put it in the appropriate CQs.
  • Document a decision tree that CQ submitters use to answer questions when opening a CQ
    • PMC members +1 when they agree with the submitters answers.

Back to the top