Editorial Board

[Rod Dixon]

I am glad this issue is being discussed further.  I think the  
editorial board proposal maximizes the time and skill set to the  
benefit of OSI of those who could volunteer for this.  I support this  
proposal.

Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
>
>
>> 2. There is a mostly quiet group of experts who lurk on this list  
>> (I won't
>> name you now but you know who you are!). They often avoid speaking up
>> because it generally results in even more noise. Those people should
>> volunteer (or be appointed?) to participate on an Editorial Board.  
>> They can
>> read the summarized issues in the tracking system and respond in  
>> writing as
>> their time and expertise permit. I assume responses will be deemed  
>> to be
>> individual and not representative of that Editorial Board member's  
>> company,
>> firm or affiliation, and NOT LEGAL ADVICE. Any interested in  
>> serving on such
>> an Editorial Board should please respond to this email, privately or
>> publicly, so we can determine if there would be enough talented
>> participation to make such an effort worthwhile.
>
> I am in support of this (or at least, what I currently understand it  
> to be. :)
>
> The Free Software Foundation has offered a service like this for years
> through the license compliance lab. I've volunteered with the service
> for several years and believe that it offers a tremendous amount of
> value to the community at large.
>
> With the FSF there are well-defined positions that make answering many
> of the questions posed an easier task. Additionally, the service is
> exactly that - a service. We aim to help Free Software developers
> understand and resolve licensing issues so that they can get on with
> the work of writing Free Software.
>
> I would very much like to see the OSI equivalent of this service adopt
> the same service ethic. Too often novices post questions on the
> license-discuss list and receive little or no useful advice - I fear
> that they may leave more confused than when they arrived. By focusing
> on helping working developers solve real issues, we can help avoid
> this.
>
>> 3. The collective responses of the Editorial Board can be used to  
>> create an
>> OSI FAQ, or perhaps one will automatically evolve out of the  
>> comments posted
>> in the issue tracking system through the wonders of Web 2.0  
>> technology. In
>> any event, the result of the efforts by 1 and 2 should be a  
>> compendium of
>> expert comments about specific open source issues, with a high
>> signal-to-noise ratio.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> 4. For issues relating to license approval and the like, the public  
>> comments
>> of the Editorial Board to issues collected by the triage agents from
>> license-discuss can serve as input to the Board of Directors when  
>> they vote.
>
> This concerns me a bit. Why can't the experts use the same channels as
> the rest of the community?
>
> Once we start managing the license approval discussions more
> effectively, the process should not be that painful.
>
> I don't wish to formally create several classes of license approval  
> citizen.
>
> -- 
> Cheers!
> --zak
>