Happy to move to a more reasonable place… suggestions? Would it make sense to hang them off of: https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Main_Page before the 'OpenDaylight Project Documentation' section?

Hi Dave, I definitely recognize that there is a lot of pressure (from press, developers, even from ourselves) to show that the daylight community can make progress and produce useful code, but I'm not

It time frames are the problem, those can be adjusted. As I mentioned it is more important that we make progress in a timely fashion than the actual date of this or that (at least until we get to

* Rob Sherwood (rob.sherwood@...) wrote: The problem we have right now is no clear path forward to a single core code base. As a consequence, we can't really even point would-be users or

Did we settle on something here? If so, I didn't see it. My pref would be to extend our existing meeting rather than have another one, because we always loose time trying to make sure everyone is on

Rob, we haven't closed on this yet but I have put it on the agenda for Thursday (which should be posted today (RSN)). --dmm

Hi, Phil Robb is inviting you to this WebEx meeting:

Maybe make a "Core Architectural Principles" or similar after Hackfests (so it would be # 5). Then link your's off that? That way we have a place we can perhaps have discussions around this or other

See https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/TSC:Main for call information, agenda, and the like. Thnx, --dmm

I like the way this is handled in the OpenStack Technical Committee: Motions Before being put to a vote, motions presented before the TC should be discussed publicly on the development

I would be in favor of instituting wording to this effect. Thanks Chris for bringing this up.

I've been meaning to bring this up for some time now... I believe we should establish some guidelines on project names. The current bootstrap projects have named themselves in ways that are not

Chris - This makes sense to me. One question about implementation: who/what is the naming authority for projects? Would the project proposal suggest their own name, or would the name be assigned to a

Chris, >> I've been meaning to bring this up for some time now... >> >> I believe we should establish some guidelines on project names. >> The current bootstrap projects have named themselves in

* Benson Schliesser (bensons@...) wrote: The initial project proposal comes with a name of their choosing that must comply w/ our TBD guidelines (for example, not calling

That is the TSC with a proposed name from the project proposer, if you ask me. In principle, the TSC would keep the naming consistent. --Tom

From: David Meyer <dmm@...> Date: Thursday, May 2, 2013 2:51 PM To: "tsc@..." <tsc@...> Subject: Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] OpenDaylight TSC] project names Agree. The names should perhaps indicate their

Benson, The Project Lifecycle already includes this in the proposal. Clearly a naming problem (for example a trademark or branding or other issue) would preclude acceptance of the proposal until it

Fwiw, I'm very supportive of this with the caveat that it may hard to find neutral names for things and we may need to open it up to suggestions. Maybe using some sort of prefix like

Hello all, Is editing of the Controller Project's Modules/Bundles and Interfaces Page going to be open to the public at some point? Aleksandar Miljusevic