Re: SPI resolution 2016.05.05.bg.1: NTPsec as associated project

Please add this resolution to our May agenda.

NTPsec is a secure, hardened, and improved implementation of Network Time
Protocol derived from NTP Classic, Dave Mills’s original.

The project has a website with community and project documentation at
http://ntpsec.org/

The project's development forge is at https://gitlab.com/groups/NTPsec

The NTPsec project wishes for SPI to accept donations and hold funds,
along with holding intangible assets, specifically the ntpsec.org domain
name.

Bdale

SPI resolution 2016.05.05.bg.1

WHEREAS

1. NTPsec is a substantial and significant Free Software project.
2. NTPsec developers would like SPI's support and assistance, including
taking donations.

THE SPI BOARD RESOLVES THAT

3. The NTPsec Project is formally invited to become an SPI Associated
Project, according to the SPI Framework for Associated Projects, SPI
Resolution 1998-11-16.iwj.1-amended-2004-08-10.iwj.1, a copy of which can
be found at
http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/resolutions/2004/2004-08-10.iwj.1/
4. Mark Atwood is recognised by SPI as the authoritative decision maker and
SPI liaison for the NTPsec Project. Successors will be appointed by the
outgoing SPI liaison, or if the current SPI liaison is unavailable or
refuses to appoint a successor, by a simple majority vote by the three top
code contributors to the NTPsec of the previous year.
5. This invitation will lapse, if not accepted, 60 days after it is
approved by the SPI Board.

I haven't seen any conversation with the board about what they need,
what they are looking for, etc.

I don't know how I should vote on a resolution without any prior
conversation at all.

Why hasn't Mark been in contact with the board?

--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/

Martin Michlmayr <tbm(at)cyrius(dot)com> writes:

> I haven't seen any conversation with the board about what they need,
> what they are looking for, etc.
>
> I don't know how I should vote on a resolution without any prior
> conversation at all.
>
> Why hasn't Mark been in contact with the board?

He talked to me. The needs and expectations seemed simple enough that I
didn't think a lot of conversation would be required, but part of the
reason for including spi-private and spi-general here was so that
discussion can occur, so go for it!

Bdale

On 05/06/2016 10:02 AM, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> Martin Michlmayr <tbm(at)cyrius(dot)com> writes:
>
>> I haven't seen any conversation with the board about what they need,
>> what they are looking for, etc.
>>
>> I don't know how I should vote on a resolution without any prior
>> conversation at all.
>>
>> Why hasn't Mark been in contact with the board?
>
> He talked to me. The needs and expectations seemed simple enough that I
> didn't think a lot of conversation would be required, but part of the
> reason for including spi-private and spi-general here was so that
> discussion can occur, so go for it!

The board is not all that responsive as a whole. If someone gets a board
member to talk to them (which has happened here and with myself multiple
times) that should be good enough to at least write a resolution.

Of course it is good to have discourse on the resolution but the idea
that we will discuss everything and THEN right a resolution is why we
have projects waiting since November to be approved.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.

On Thu, May 5, 2016, at 15:20, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> NTPsec is a secure, hardened, and improved implementation of Network Time
> Protocol derived from NTP Classic, Dave Mills’s original.
> > The NTPsec project wishes for SPI to accept donations and hold funds,
> along with holding intangible assets, specifically the ntpsec.org domain
> name.

Thank you Bdale.

Like the request says, NTPsec wants to be an SPI project. What we need
is someone to hold the DNS and to enable us to accept and account
donations.

I am the PM for the project, and can answer any questions about it.

--
Mark Atwood <me(at)mark(dot)atwood(dot)name>
+1-206-604-2198

Hi,

On Thu May 05, 2016 at 16:20:13 -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> Please add this resolution to our May agenda.
>
> NTPsec is a secure, hardened, and improved implementation of Network Time
> Protocol derived from NTP Classic, Dave Mills’s original.
>
> The project has a website with community and project documentation at
> http://ntpsec.org/
>
> The project's development forge is at https://gitlab.com/groups/NTPsec
>
> The NTPsec project wishes for SPI to accept donations and hold funds,
> along with holding intangible assets, specifically the ntpsec.org domain
> name.
>
> Bdale
>
>
> SPI resolution 2016.05.05.bg.1
>
> WHEREAS
>
> 1. NTPsec is a substantial and significant Free Software project.
> 2. NTPsec developers would like SPI's support and assistance, including
> taking donations.
>
> THE SPI BOARD RESOLVES THAT
>
> 3. The NTPsec Project is formally invited to become an SPI Associated
> Project, according to the SPI Framework for Associated Projects, SPI
> Resolution 1998-11-16.iwj.1-amended-2004-08-10.iwj.1, a copy of which can
> be found at
> http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/resolutions/2004/2004-08-10.iwj.1/
> 4. Mark Atwood is recognised by SPI as the authoritative decision maker and
> SPI liaison for the NTPsec Project. Successors will be appointed by the
> outgoing SPI liaison, or if the current SPI liaison is unavailable or
> refuses to appoint a successor, by a simple majority vote by the three top
> code contributors to the NTPsec of the previous year.
> 5. This invitation will lapse, if not accepted, 60 days after it is
> approved by the SPI Board.

I would like to see something like the following added to the resolution:

6. In the event that the NTPsec project dissolves without defining what
SPI shall do with the managed assets or the NTPsec project becomes
provable uncontactable for SPI, the board reserves the right to assign
those assets to it's general fund.

That maybe needs a bit of rewording as i am not a native english
speaker, but i hope everyone gets what i mean here.

The smae paragraph should IMHO be added to all the other 4 resolutions
we tend to vote on in two days.

Best regards,
Martin
--
Martin Zobel-Helas <zobel(at)spi-inc(dot)org>
Software in the Public Interest, Inc. | Member of the Board of Directors
GPG Fingerprint: 6B18 5642 8E41 EC89 3D5D BDBB 53B1 AC6D B11B 627B

Hi,

On Tue May 10, 2016 at 23:13:47 +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu May 05, 2016 at 16:20:13 -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> > Please add this resolution to our May agenda.
> >
> > NTPsec is a secure, hardened, and improved implementation of Network Time
> > Protocol derived from NTP Classic, Dave Mills’s original.
> >
> > The project has a website with community and project documentation at
> > http://ntpsec.org/
> >
> > The project's development forge is at https://gitlab.com/groups/NTPsec
> >
> > The NTPsec project wishes for SPI to accept donations and hold funds,
> > along with holding intangible assets, specifically the ntpsec.org domain
> > name.
> >
> > Bdale
> >
> >
> > SPI resolution 2016.05.05.bg.1
> >
> > WHEREAS
> >
> > 1. NTPsec is a substantial and significant Free Software project.
> > 2. NTPsec developers would like SPI's support and assistance, including
> > taking donations.
> >
> > THE SPI BOARD RESOLVES THAT
> >
> > 3. The NTPsec Project is formally invited to become an SPI Associated
> > Project, according to the SPI Framework for Associated Projects, SPI
> > Resolution 1998-11-16.iwj.1-amended-2004-08-10.iwj.1, a copy of which can
> > be found at
> > http://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/resolutions/2004/2004-08-10.iwj.1/
> > 4. Mark Atwood is recognised by SPI as the authoritative decision maker and
> > SPI liaison for the NTPsec Project. Successors will be appointed by the
> > outgoing SPI liaison, or if the current SPI liaison is unavailable or
> > refuses to appoint a successor, by a simple majority vote by the three top
> > code contributors to the NTPsec of the previous year.
> > 5. This invitation will lapse, if not accepted, 60 days after it is
> > approved by the SPI Board.
>
> I would like to see something like the following added to the resolution:
>
> 6. In the event that the NTPsec project dissolves without defining what
> SPI shall do with the managed assets or the NTPsec project becomes
> provable uncontactable for SPI, the board reserves the right to assign
> those assets to it's general fund.
>
> That maybe needs a bit of rewording as i am not a native english
> speaker, but i hope everyone gets what i mean here.
>
> The smae paragraph should IMHO be added to all the other 4 resolutions
> we tend to vote on in two days.

For those who are wondering, why i want this added: During our face2face
meeting earlier this year we were advised by SFLC to add a paragraph
like this to every future resolution. Otherwise if a project goes MIA or
even dissolves without giving us any notice, we cannot take their money
or other assets and use them for something else.

Martin
--
Martin Zobel-Helas <zobel(at)spi-inc(dot)org>
Software in the Public Interest, Inc. | Member of the Board of Directors
GPG Fingerprint: 6B18 5642 8E41 EC89 3D5D BDBB 53B1 AC6D B11B 627B

On Tue, May 10, 2016, at 14:13, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> I would like to see something like the following added to the resolution:
>
> 6. In the event that the NTPsec project dissolves without defining what
> SPI shall do with the managed assets or the NTPsec project becomes
> provable uncontactable for SPI, the board reserves the right to assign
> those assets to it's general fund.
>
> That maybe needs a bit of rewording as i am not a native english
> speaker, but i hope everyone gets what i mean here.
>
> The smae paragraph should IMHO be added to all the other 4 resolutions
> we tend to vote on in two days.

As the NTPsec contact, I have no objection to that.

..m