[sakai2-tcc] Planning for Sakai 2.10 and beyond

[Charles Severance]

I am not asking you to change your blog post.  That would be wrong.   The discussions is fine and we all learn from debate.  I am glad to have the positions on record.  But you should clarify what you intended or if the discussion changed your position it would be nice to acknowledge that.

I did just send a note to the board asking you to go on record as to whether or not you will vote for or against creating an intermediate governance group that sits between the TCC and the Apereo board should the merger go through.

The TCC *should* be renamed to reflect the Apereo naming structure once the Apereo merger is done.  It makes perfect sense.   So it should be:

uPortal Steering Committee
Sakai CLE Steering Committee (renamed form the TCC)
Sakai OAE Steering Committee 
Sakai T/L Steering Committee
CAS Steering Committee 
Bedework Steering Committee
...

And the Sakai CLE Steering Committee should expand its remit to match the uPortal and CAS Steering committees.

What is unacceptable to me is

uPortal Steering Committee
Sakai Steering Committee (new people to be picked by the Apereo board)
   Sakai CLE TCC
   Sakai OAE
   Sakai T/L

Steve - this is important - it matters - if the net result of the Apereo merger is to secretly re-create the Sakai Product Council - that is bad - very very bad.  It is particularly troubling coming from a member of the Apereo founding board that is also a member of the TCC.  If you truly think that the Product Council was a great idea that was never given a fair chance - and that we should recreate it in Apereo - then please say so on the record.  Please be clear.

/Chuck

On Sep 24, 2012, at 7:29 PM, Steve Swinsburg wrote:

> I don't think I should be forced to withdraw my suggestions, that isn't what this free and open community is all about. In any case, what I called for, and what you think I called for, are very different approaches.
> 
> I never said the TCC was incapable of anything non-technical. I said that it should not be muddied by this task. By its very nature and name, the TCC *is* technical. I know the reasons behind the name, I was there. However if this group, the TCC, is the group that undertakes the community consultation, develops the roadmap, and rallies resources to get things done (the things that I have said we need to do), then so be it, but we should change the name of this group to better reflect the role that the group is taking.
> 
> regards,
> Steve
> 
> 
> On 25/09/2012, at 3:00 AM, Charles Severance <csev at umich.edu> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Sep 24, 2012, at 12:56 PM, Nate Angell wrote:
>> 
>>> I move we all drop further discussion of that chapter and only talk
>>> about what we are going to do next.
>> 
>> I am happy to drop all further discussion about the past as long as Steve withdraws his suggestion that we recreate the PC or something similar because he sees the TCC as incapable of doing anything non-technical (as he states in his blog post).
>> 
>> /Chuck
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> sakai2-tcc mailing list
>> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai2-tcc/attachments/20120924/23d58d1f/attachment.html