Hi Morris, this is not the final text yet, but a call for input, as it is said both in the subject and in the text. Please do not copy it into any Word file, I will send you one (and upload to the GridForge). Cheers, Oxana 12.11.2010 06:06, Morris Riedel пишет:
Hi,
when I copy this into a word file using font size 11 this process is more than a half page as agreed. Could you please shorten it and make it more concrete to PGI.
Many thanks.
Take care, Morris
-- -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- -- Von: pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org] Im Auftrag von Oxana Smirnova -- Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. November 2010 23:27 -- An: pgi-wg@ogf.org -- Betreff: [Pgi-wg] PGI decision-making process - seeking input -- -- Hi all, -- -- some suggestions on decision-making process in PGI were already made, both on this list and during today's -- meeting (trust me ;-) ). I was appointed by the group co-chair to prepare a proposal for simple internal -- guidelines (this ought to be in the minutes). -- -- I therefore would like to solicit input from those of you who have opinion and did not express it yet. I'll try -- to outline the background: -- -- 1. PGI stands for "Production Grid Infrastructures", specifically: -- 1a. Stakeholders represent parties enabling production grid infrastructures: -- * administrators -- * middleware providers -- * users -- 2. (1) implies certain group specific, namely: -- 2a. Stakeholders enter with pre-existing deployed solutions, related interfaces etc -- 2b. There are substantial numbers of customers behind every stakeholder -- 2c. There is a substantial, and ever growing, number of stakeholders -- -- For reference, here's a list of distinct stakeholders represented in PGI which I deduced from currently active -- PGI participants, in no particular order: -- UNICORE, DEISA/PRACE, Globus/IGE, EDGI, NDGF, ARC, EGI, gLite, GENESIS, TeraGrid, SAGA, NAREGI/RENKEI, NGS (and -- I probably missed some). -- Several stakeholders are represented by more than 1 individual. Even if UNICORE, ARC and gLite will become a -- single EMI stakeholder, there will still be more than 10. -- -- In general, the group should follow the OGF guidelines and aim to achieve consensus. However, due to the large -- number of stakeholders and high stakes, consensus is often practically impossible. In such cases, decisions must -- be made following a consistent *open* procedure, and not left to the judgement of a single person: this is how -- it is done in modern democratic societies. -- -- A solution can be to: -- a) Limit number of decision-makers by applying criteria such as affiliation (one voice per stakeholder) and/or -- attendance (75% attendance of all group meetings, or similar), or -- b) Introduce voting procedures (quorum, majority, tie-breaking, veto), or -- c) Combine (a) and (b). -- -- Important decisions which involve complex documents and/or potentially affect functionality of the production -- Grid infrastructures, must be well prepared in advance: -- * proposal authors must provide sufficient material for the stakeholders such that they can use it to consult -- their user base if necessary -- * sufficient preparatory stage must be allowed, during which all the stakeholders will have the opportunity to -- study the proposals and consult their customers if necessary -- * materials must be made public on GridForge and advertised on the PGI mailing list, together with relevant -- deadlines -- * decisions achieved by consensus, and *especially* those achieved by voting, must be documented in respective -- public meeting notes for further reference -- -- -- Please send your thoughts either to the list or directly to me by next Wednesday, November 17. -- -- -- I anticipate irritated comments about overcomplicating the process and violating OGF rules. Believe me, there is -- nothing complicated, and this is a very simplified model of public decision-making process, successfully used in -- bodies from condominium boards to country parliaments. Ad-hoc procedures, absence of relevant documentation and -- reliance on a wise leader typically lead to stagnation and failures, even if there are individual success -- stories. I am confident OGF is not pursuing this latter track. -- -- -- Cheers, -- Oxana