HistoryViewLinks to this page 2013 July 16 | 11:13 am

2013 July 8, 10 AM PDT / 1 PM EDT / 6 PM BST
Virtual meeting details

This is the 2nd meeting of the OSLC Member Section at OASIS Steering Committee.

Meeting Goals

  1. Decide on the proposal to “pipeline” the creation of affiliated TCs.
  2. Endorse a general liaisons policy
  3. Set direction on how to respond to INCOSE’s request for a liaison relationship
  4. Create a subcommittee to drive the conversion of the OSLC Member Section to being funded



1. Technical Committee Creation [review|discuss|vote: 30m]

Executive Summary

by Sean Kennedy

So far we have only looked to creating the Core TC, but the lack of a defined plan beyond that means we don’t have good answers to some common questions, such as:

  • What TC(s) comes after Core?
  • If we knew what was next, when would it happen?
  • How are MS members supposed to get value out of their membership?
  • Why would new organizations join the MS?

1a Proposal Overview [review: 10m]


by Sean Kennedy

Create a “pipeline” of new TCs starting with Core and following on with domain TCs driven by the interest and energy of the community.
See also: OSLC TC Creation Proposal

1b Proposal Discussion and Vote [discuss|vote: 20m]

Projected Order of Business

by The Chair

  1. Ask questions and discuss the proposal.
  2. Discuss any refinement and/or amendments to it.
  3. Vote.

2. Liaisons [vote|vote: 10m]

Executive Summary

by Sean Kennedy

Here is the OASIS Liaison Policy. There are two kinds of liaison relationships: 1) organization liaisons, and 2) TC/MS liaisons. Basically, the first is more work to set up, but then the designated OASIS member can participate at the other organization and the other org’s designate can participate at OASIS; while the second is simpler to set up, but requires a person who has membership in both organizations to act as the liaison.

The full list of OASIS liaisons includes the Cloud Standards Customer Council, IEEE, IETF, ISO, The Open Group, and W3C.
The full list does not include ARTEMIS (EC Projects), INCOSE, OMG, or PROSTEP iViP.

In March 2013, INCOSE requested a liaison relationship with OSLC. Our reply was to wait until we were established at OASIS.

2a General Policy [vote: 5m]


by Sean Kennedy

Requirements for liaison:

  1. That there be a person willing to accept the responsibilities of being the liaison, i.e. being active in both organizations.
  2. That a case has been made as to why this is good for both organizations.

Whether it is an organization, or TC/MS, liaison can be decided based on the circumstances of the particular request.

Projected Order of Business

by The Chair

  1. Questions, comments, and/or amendments to the proposal.
  2. Vote

2b Liaison Request from INCOSE [vote: 5m]


by Sean Kennedy

Given INCOSE’s established “list of partnerships”, which includes IEEE, ISO, and OMG, let us pursue the creation of an organization liaison between OASIS and INCOSE.

Projected Order of Business

by The Chair

  1. Questions, comments, and/or amendments to the proposal.
  2. Vote

3. Converting to be a funded Member Section [review|vote: 15m]

3a Rough plan for converting [review: 5m]

Executive Summary

by Dave Ings

Rough plan for converting to a funded Member Section:

  1. SC socializes idea with Member Section, explains why this would be a good idea, what kind of activities would be funded
  2. SC builds draft 2014 spending plan / program, determines what % of individual member dues will be allocated to MS (range is 0 to 30%)
  3. If MS sentiment seems to be positive, SC holds special majority vote to approve conversion and the draft plan.
  4. SC representative works with OASIS staff to finalize 2014 budget and spending plan
  5. OASIS staff rolls the request into the annual OASIS budget cycle, for approval at the January Board meeting.

It’s probably not quite that linear, but that’s the general idea. Time-wise, you need to feed into the annual OASIS budget planning cycle which starts in the fall. Because this is a budgetary item, you get one shot a year to do this.

The key data points (and it’s a bit of chicken and egg) are: how much money do plan to spend annually, i.e. what’s the the allocation %, and what do you plan to spend it on? The Board will not approve the conversion request / budget unless there is a reasonable spending plan roughly aligned with the allocation %.

What exactly is the allocation %? If you belong to a funded MS, a % of your annual dues is moved from general OASIS revenue into an account, still held by OASIS, but for use by the MS. If you belong to multiple funded MS’s, there is a formula for how the allocations are made (shared).

3b Proposal to become a funded Member Section [vote]: 10m]


by Sean Kennedy

As originally intended when the creation of a Member Section was first discussed, the Steering Committee will pursue conversion to a funded Member Section. A subcommittee, chaired by TBD from the Steering Committee, will use the “rough plan” above as its starting point, and provide updates to the Steering Committee on a regular basis. The subcommittee should have its first meeting no later than Friday, July 19, 2013.

Projected Order of Business

by The Chair

  1. Questions, comments, and/or amendments to the proposal.
  2. Selection of subcommittee chair
  3. Vote


Steering Committee

  • Rainer Ersch, Senior Research Scientist at Siemens
  • Andreas Keis, Manager, Software Engineering at EADS Innovation Works UK
  • Mik Kersten, CEO of Tasktop
  • Bola Rotibi, Research Director at Creative Intellect
  • John Wiegand, Distinguished Engineer and Chief Architect for IBM Rational (StC Chairman)

Steering Committee Regrets

  • David Ingram, Managing Director at Accenture

Steering Committee Staff

  • Operations Coordinator, Sean Kennedy, IBM
  • Technical Coordinator, Steve Speicher, IBM


1. Technical Committee Creation


  • Rainer: good pipeline
    • concerned that the first Domain TC is too close to Core
    • Sean: the intention of the dates, as they are, is that if people are energized, they could drive to the November date
    • Rainer: would prefer that we communicate explicit dates …
      • i.e. that you need to have your charter ready to submit by such and such a date
  • Andreas: is there already pressure from the MS to create domain TCs?
    • Sean: no known pressure from within the MS
  • John: generally, I think we’re interested in establishing a pipeline
    • a second question: why have these orgs joined the MS?
      • I would like Sean (representing us) to spend 30 minutes with each company to find out why they joined the MS; we need this data
    • Bola, Mik … (everyone) agrees with this idea
    • Bola: this will be very helpful for keeping the level of engagement up
    • Rainer: you can use this chart, even further refined with dates when you speak with the
  • John: summary:
    • we like the pipeline approach, there are some edits we can do offline by email
    • we want to communicate that where going to work in this step-by-step approach
    • we will personally survey them on both the TC topic, and other topics too
    • unanimous agreement
  • Sean: please let me know if you have any detailed feedback on the pipeline approach
    • I will also share, for feedback, the couple or three questions I will ask each org

2. Liaisons


2a General Policy

Proposed Policy
by unanimous vote

2b Proposal to pursue a liaison with INCOSE



  • Rainer: INCOSE is the best to validate our general policy with, both because of the known mutual interest, but also because they have experience liaising
  • John: if in the process of working with INCOSE, it makes better sense to do the other liaison type, lets not be limited by our initial effort to create it as the organizational type
  • Andreas will be the primary contact for INCOSE, Sean will help, Rainer willing to help too
  • Rainer will start a list of other orgs that we may want to liaise with

by unanimous vote, including that Andreas is the primary rep

3. Converting to be a Funded Member Section

By email, from Rainer:

I talked to Dave (Ings) to clarify some questions regarding this topic and we came to the following conclusion:

  • Since it’s already listed as an option in ROP, converting should be fairly easy
  • the deadline for a funding plan will be probably around early October
    • Dave will check whether he can get a template or example for a budget plan
  • rule of thumb: everything promoting OSLC (and OASIS) is eligible e.g.
    • OSLC summit costs (risk or reduced fees)
    • OSLC workshops and such
    • Sending OSLC members to conferences to speak about OSLC
    • Costs associated with building liaisons with other organizations
  • not clear whether these are eligible (Dave will check with Scott McGrath) :
    • costs for additional StC F2F meetings
    • travel costs in general
  • Expected budget:
    • based on a rough calculation we assume that we can ask for 25k+
    • Will be more, if more organization will join OSLC MS in 2013 (e.g. like GM)
    • Dave will check to see whether he can get a better number from Scott


  • what’s the StC opinion on getting a funded MS?
    • voting: does the StC want to pursue the plan converting to a funded MS as of 2014?
      • final decision about submitting the budget request in the September meeting (shortly before budget deadline).
      • create a subcommittee to work out budget plan and details
  • any particular activities which should be added to the funding plan?


  • Rainer: really wanted to see if we want to approve this
    • there are many good uses for funding (about $30k/yr)
    • recommend that we start a subcommittee today
      • Sean: some documentation is required to create a subcommittee, we won’t be able to do this today
      • (Ed.: after a little more review, a subcommittee is deemed to be too heavyweight for this activity)
  • Andreas: how does the money get managed? what is the additional workload?
    • these are things that need to be addressed
  • John: I’m hearing that we should create what the proposal is and that we should understand the extra burdens involved
    • John: this sounds like something that should be kicked off informally as a ad hoc StC work group
  • Rainer: I will continue to lead this effort with help from Dave Ings
    • I also need your informal input on ideas for what we’ll spend the money on


by Sean Kennedy

This topic was added at the last minutes to allow for a brief discussion of some recent email related to the PROMIS group looking for alternates to creating an OSLC UG as was proposed after the June meeting (details: discussion, agreement 5).

Discussion Summary
by Sean Kennedy

The long-term visions that the PROMIS group and the OSLC StC have for the PROMIS work and (Software) Supply Chain in OSLC may well be aligned. We have the challenge of figuring out the right next steps so that the long-term can be realized.

As IBM is a member of both the OSLC StC and PROMIS, John (with Sean’s help) will take the lead in figuring out the next steps (as well as confirming that there is agreement on the long-term vision).


Agreements and Consensus in this meeting

  1. Use the “pipeline” approach to creating domain TCs
    1. suggested edits and tweaks are to be handled by email to Sean
    2. Sean, on our behalf is to connect with each organization in the MS to learn what they hope to get out of their participation and what work is interesting to them
  2. Approved the Liaison Requirements Policy
  3. Pursue a liaison relationship with INCOSE
    1. Andreas will be the leader for this activity
    2. Rainer and Sean will help too
  4. Create a proposal for review to convert to a funded Member Section
    1. Rainer will continue to lead this effort with the help of Dave Ings
  5. John will work to confirm that there is long-term alignment between the OSLC StC’s goals and the PROMIS groups goals and to figure out some mutually acceptable next steps.
    1. Sean will assist.

Action Items from this meeting

  1. Sean: have 1-on-1 discussions with the MS supporters about their goals and interests
  2. Andreas: pursue a liaison relationship with INCOSE
  3. Rainer: create a proposal for review to convert to a funded Member Section
  4. John: follow up with the internal IBM contact from PROMIS to discuss next steps and vision

Future Agenda Topics from this meeting

  1. [review|vote]: proposal to convert to be a funded MS - Rainer

Category:Meeting agendas

Category:Meeting Minutes