OpenSolaris Membership

January 26, 2007 2:54 am General

So Stephen was interested in hearing some perspectives around the OpenSolaris Governance model that’s in the process of being established. The current OpenSolaris Governance draft presents a couple of interesting situations around the formation of an initial membership (Note: my interpretation of the constitution could be false), based on the ideals set out in the constitution.

In section 4.2. Admission of Members it states –

The initial set of Members for the OpenSolaris Community shall be those natural persons designated by the existing OpenSolaris projects as Core Contributors to their projects. The initial set is intended to be a representative sample of the Community’s existing core contributors and need not include every person that might fit that level of involvement.

Stephen has attempted to solicit an initial list from the various community leaders – we have that result here, setting out Core Contributors and Contributors according to each community. Having scanned over it, overall it seems to be pretty representative of my observations of activity over the last year or so, although there’s some somewhat surprising omissions and lack of thought/feedback from a few communities.

Let’s remind ourselves of those roles from section 3.3. Roles –

Contributor
A participant who has been acknowledged by one or more Community Groups as having substantively contributed toward accomplishing the tasks of that Community Group, or by the OGB for at-large contributions, shall be termed an OpenSolaris Contributor. Such designation is permanent and persists regardless of the person’s current level of activity or status within the Community. A Contributor may request that their status not be published or published only in the form of a pseudonym that is unique within the Community.
Core Contributor
A Contributor who is an active and sustained contributor to any Community Group and accepts designation as such by said Group shall be termed a Core Contributor for said Group and granted the status of Member for the OpenSolaris Community as a whole.

Let’s return back to section 4.2. Admission of Members, and an interesting line –

The initial set (Ed: of Members) shall be admitted upon the affirmative vote of the OGB at the initial meeting of the OGB.

So as time draws closer to an election according to the proposed timeline, how does this initial list get approved and submitted – by the existing OGB? or by the newly elected OGB at the initial meeting? If the latter, who decides the initial list of people that can vote?

Moreover, in section 5.10. Voting and 6.2. Composition –

Each Member shall be entitled to one vote on each matter submitted to a vote at a meeting of the members.

The OGB shall consist of a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of seven (7) natural persons (“OGB members”) elected by the Members.

which suggests that only a very small handful of non-Sun people (having scanned the list) can actually vote in the upcoming elections which, if true, I would be heavily disappointed to the extent that my personal decisions made on behalf of the Desktop community would have been very different as a result.

How do we sustain these membership levels? Are they a good reflection of the OpenSolaris community when a lot of the actual development is happening in projects rather than the various sub-communities? Will it always be subjective and entirely up to the discretion of Core Contributors? Does that give us the opportunity of maximum growth within the OpenSolaris community as a whole?

In the GNOME, we have a different governance model – it’s a lot more informal, though keeps with similar principles of a meritocracy (at least we’d like to think it does). Our membership has evolved over several years and, through many heated discussions, embraces being open and welcoming. Nat wrote an excellent mail, which describes our ideals, much like the code of conduct is trying to achieve. Membership is for life, though needs to renewed every 2 years. We figure that if someone cares enough about renewing their membership, they still care enough about GNOME, and quite frankly for the majority, we need those people around. Consequently, the people who write the code or contribute the most generally tend to create the direction of the project. Although at times we really struggle with making decisions, we seem to get by for the most part, and the GNOME goes from strength to strength.

So while I don’t think the current OpenSolaris constitution is bad in any way, shape or form, it presents some interesting challenges particularly in being able to adapt to changes in the environment, while still encouraging a growing community. Finding that fine line between those that want an extensible and dynamic community and those that want to constantly tow the party line and quote the constitution may be tricky. I’m personally looking forward to that evolution in the projet and excited about getting involved.

Comments are closed.