London meeting and resolving non-consensus issues

[Jeromy Carriere]

Hi all:

Ben and I started drafting an agenda for our face-to-face meeting in London.  Please take a look and add your thoughts. We intentionally left the agenda partially formed so that the group could help shape it.

A topic I wanted to get opinions on: should we establish a, dare I say it, process for resolving issues that we can't reach consensus on? Like IETF's? Of course I'd prefer that we achieve consensus as much as possible, but I don't want us to get stuck and not be able to make progress.

J

[Ben Kochie]

The IETF process seems to mostly involve appeals to a governance structure, in particular a working group chair, and then up the IETF authority chain.  Since we're a bit small, and haven't elected an official leadership body, it may not work for now.

We could adopt a "board of directors", and vote in representatives from each of the groups currently involved.  They would represent the "chair" and deal with non-consensus items.

We currently seem to have a good odd-number set of core organizations, Google, InfluxData, and Prometheus.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenMetrics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openmetrics+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to openm...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmetrics/CAJ%2BrH082-NUiOBwiLBT6LND10-DdJifdskx62Epc3_7PC6KSeQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jeromy Carriere]

Ping.  Could folks take a look at the agenda doc?

J

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 5:21 AM Ben Kochie <sup...@gmail.com> wrote:

The IETF process seems to mostly involve appeals to a governance structure, in particular a working group chair, and then up the IETF authority chain.  Since we're a bit small, and haven't elected an official leadership body, it may not work for now.

We could adopt a "board of directors", and vote in representatives from each of the groups currently involved.  They would represent the "chair" and deal with non-consensus items.

We currently seem to have a good odd-number set of core organizations, Google, InfluxData, and Prometheus.

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 7:38 PM, 'Jeromy Carriere' via OpenMetrics <openm...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Hi all:

Ben and I started drafting an agenda for our face-to-face meeting in London.  Please take a look and add your thoughts. We intentionally left the agenda partially formed so that the group could help shape it.

A topic I wanted to get opinions on: should we establish a, dare I say it, process for resolving issues that we can't reach consensus on? Like IETF's? Of course I'd prefer that we achieve consensus as much as possible, but I don't want us to get stuck and not be able to make progress.

J

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenMetrics" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openmetrics...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to openm...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmetrics/CAJ%2BrH082-NUiOBwiLBT6LND10-DdJifdskx62Epc3_7PC6KSeQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenMetrics" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openmetrics...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to openm...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmetrics/CABbyFmr8c_p%3DRL2JOc5CsL5V1ms2akjcgHvudXyxYtgyEWXcDg%40mail.gmail.com.