[OpenAFS] Re: Proto-TAC

Matt Benjamin matt@linuxbox.com
Thu, 06 Nov 2008 11:24:53 -0500

Hash: SHA256


Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> The most important aspect of the TAC is the use of the TAC in
> combination with OpenAFS membership to generate funds that
> can be used to support the infrastructure and processes of the
> organization.

I've gathered this, but I don't think it is necessarily understood by
the large part of the community as yet.  (Apologies if that's not the case.)

The formulation seems quite problematic to me personally, as I've stated
a number of times in public and private discussion, because as
articulated below, it appears make the community and community
developers secondary to (as yet unnamed, though that's not the concern)
investors.  (I actually think that runs counter to the spirit under
which IBM originally released the OpenAFS code, though of course I've
had no discussion with any IBM employee regarding that.)

> Organizations that write OpenAFS a check for $?0,000 or more receive a
> guaranteed seat on the TAC.  The number of organizations that do so
> determine the size of the TAC.  The TAC would contain three times the
> number of seats as the number of largest contributors.  (I think $?0,000
> is $49,500 as that number has been well received by several large
> organizations but it is still up for debate.)

I've raised some issues with the point that the number of TAC seats can
be indexed solely to the number of new corporate sponsors, that's the
point of my above remark.

> Organizations that write a check for at least $5,000 but less than
> $?0,000 fall into the second tier.  These organizations are not
> guaranteed a seat at any particular period of time.  Instead, the
> available seats are rotated among the members of the group.
> Finally, eligible individuals from the community who have demonstrated
> sufficient participation (as measured by karma points which can include
> individual contributions of money or code or assistance to other
> community members) will elect their representatives.

The basic notion seems reasonable.  As I've stated in conversation, I'm
uncertain these mechanisms are appropriately tuned, as yet, though.

> If in the case that there would be an even number of representatives
> the individuals get an extra seat.  The size of the TAC can change
> from year to year based upon the number of contributing organizations.

It should be equally important how many active, appropriately skilled
developers (and helpful others) are available, shouldn't it?

> In order to move the TAC forward, OpenAFS needs to begin soliciting
> contributions.  While Usenix is willing to accept the checks on our
> behalf, organizations have indicated that until there is a legal
> Foundation whose membership they can purchase, there is no mechanism
> by which a check can be written.  Hence in my opinion the Foundation
> and the Board of Directors must come first.



- --

Matt Benjamin

The Linux Box
206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI  48104


tel. 734-761-4689
fax. 734-769-8938
cel. 734-216-5309

Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org