[Tinyos-alliance] TO DO and meeting notes

[Matt Welsh]

That's fine but I think TEP120 is very hard to read for someone not
already familiar with the organization. The comparisons to other groups
don't really make sense until you understand what the TinyOS Alliance is
trying to accomplish. Hence it feels reversed to me.



On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 10:45 -0700, Philip Levis wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, at 7:04 AM, Matt Welsh wrote:
> 
> > Phil,
> >
> > Here are my comments on TEP120.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> 
> OK, read through the comments and have edited the TEP.
> 
> The basic thread in your comments seems to be "give me more  
> specifics." But I'm not sure that this is appropriate at this time;  
> if we state *exactly* how something works, then it cannot evolve. For  
> example, the IETF has gone by the mantra of "working code" for a long  
> time, but doesn't have a crisp and precise decision of what that  
> means. It means, well, that things work and interoperate. The have  
> bakeoffs which might have protocol or domain specific tests, but  
> there is no written down in stone specification of what the phrase  
> "working code" means.
> 
> I agree with respect to the comments on legal issues. When I spoke  
> with a lawyer a few months ago, she commented that we need to be very  
> careful with certain text. I think this is in David's court.
> 
> I disagree that the mission needs to come before the discussion of  
> other organizations. That's what the charter is for. The mission  
> statement makes more sense when you consider it in light of the goals  
> and policies of organizations that don't *quite* fit our needs.
> 
> I'll commit the changes later today.
> 
> Phil
> 
>