[Tinyos-alliance] 7/11 Meeting notes

[Philip Levis]

On Jul 11, 2006, at 12:15 PM, David E. Culler wrote:

>
>
> Topic 2: Exercising the steering committee function of ushering  
> TEPs from draft to Final
>     We agreed that the Alliance WG would provide this function till  
> a proper steering committee is in place.  Following the Govindan  
> proposal in the TEP, the committee should assign a Review Organizer  
> to each TEP that is ready to move from draft to final.  That person  
> would be responsible for conducting the review process and should  
> not be a member of the WG forwarding the TEP.  They would solicit  
> public comment, analysis by experts, or other forms of feedback as  
> they see fit.  The TOS2 group has forwarded three such TEPs.  We  
> took the liberty of proposing review organizers to establish this  
> precedent.
>
> TEP 101 ADC:     Jack
> TEP 102 Timer:   Deborah
> TEP 103 Storage: Ramesh
>
> Will you be so kind as to accept.  I will work with Kristin to  
> facilitate the public solicitation through tinyos.net, sourceforge,  
> and the development mailing lists.  We hope to have feedback to the  
> working group in 30 days.

I realized that it would be useful if the timeframe was 28 days,  
rather than 30 (given the meeting time offsets, this is the  
difference between 4 and 5 weeks before the Core WG can discuss  
things). Are people OK with making it 28 days?

I can update the Core WG page to note the external reviewers once  
there's an ack. I'll put Jack up now.

>
> Topic 3: Creation of the non-profit
>
> WSGR has agreed to do the legal work pro bono.
> Adam agreed to assist me in the process.
> We will have a large number of specific issues to resolve, we will  
> do this by email.  (Please chime in.)
> I will try to organize this as a secquence of specific email threads.
>
> We will end up creating two primary documents: Articles of  
> Incorporation and ByLaws.  The first is short and most basic, as it  
> is hardest to change.  The Bylaws lay out most of the processes for  
> conducting ourselves.  Most of what we have discussed in the  
> working group meetings will end up turning into legalese there.  In  
> addition, there are some fairly hefty state and federal forms.
>
> I have provided a set of samples articles/bylaws on the web pages.   
> They run the spectrum from lightweight legal structure centered on  
> individual participation to heavy weight indutrial organizations  
> where $s translate into control.  We will tackle a family of key  
> questions in follow-up threads:
>
> 1. Which organization is the closest to what we have in mind, so it  
> can serve as a template.
> 2. What should be the composition of the Board of Directors /  
> Trustees?  What characteristics define the suite of people we would  
> like to have?  Who are exmples?

> 3. Initial officers.  We need at least President, Sec, Treasurer.
> 4. What is the actual name?

On one hand, I think that TinyOS Alliance is nice and simple. On the  
other hand, the closest name to that is the ZigBee Alliance, and  
given our distance ideologically, a similarity in names could be  
confusing.

Phil