Marketing Minutes 2006-11-28

From MemberWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

URL: http://www.openajax.org/member/wiki/Marketing_Minutes_2006-11-28

Contents

[edit]

OpenAjax Alliance Marketing Committee meeting minutes 2006-11-28

[edit]

Attendees

  • David Frankel <david.frankel@sap.com>
  • Jim Driscoll <jim.driscoll@sun.com>
  • John Janetos <jjanetos@laszlosystems.com>
  • Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai@us.ibm.com>
  • Mike Wagner, Jackbe
  • Seshubabu Simhadri <ssimhadri@gce2000.com>
  • Sharat Chander <sharat.chander@sun.com>
  • Shel Finkelstein <shel.finkelstein@sap.com>
  • Todd Hay <thay@activegrid.com>
[edit]

Original Agenda

[edit]

Minutes

[edit]

Topic: Reminder about Development Process review/approval process

Shel: Why a simple yes/no vote on proposed process. Is there a better approach that would allow us to consider alternative voting algorithms I proposed; a straight yes/no vote wouldn't allow that to be considered.

Todd: There is a balance between getting something done and finding the perfect approach.

Jon: People are free to write up their feedback and create alternate proposals. But we have a timeliness issue. Some members wanted us to implement a formal process. We want to have this formal process in place so we can charter working groups and approve specifications. A key factor is that the OpenAjax Hub is getting far along and we need procedures for timely review of it by the members.

Jon: Three things can happen. 1. Members vote for approval as is and SC approves as is. 2. Members or SC suggest minor changes and SC approves current document with minor changes. 3. More major changes are warranted and SC decides to revert back to an earlier step.

Shel: Agree with need for speed. I am mainly suggesting a different voting algorithm, which would be a minor change.

Jim: I am sympathetic with Shel's position for the actual voting process. Similar to JCP. Not many things voted down with the slightly higher bar.

[edit]

Topic: Legal updates to Web site

Jon: I asked an IBM lawyer familiar with open organizations to review these documents. He cannot advise OpenAjax Alliance, but can contribute his informed personal opinion, and suggested a couple of small changes, which I made, and then said that the updated web pages look fine.

Todd: Terms of Use look fine. Nothing jumps out. Only changes were to mention the Apache license.

Jon: Which of course is what we use. Yes, it was just global search/replace versus what Eclipse uses.

Todd: Logo usage - no definition of what is official Member of OpenAjax Alliance. Use some standard language.

Jon: We typically use "as defined by OpenAjax Alliance Members Agreement". I will add that to the page. So please say whether you support going live with these pages.

Todd: Support

David/Shel: Haven't heard from their legal, so no opinion.

JohnJ: OK with this.

Mike: Everything sounds fine.

Seshu: Sounds fine, but didn't review site yet.

Jon: To access site, it's login=password=guest.

Jon: OK, I will bring this to Steering Committee for final approval. If anyone sees any problems between now and Thursday, send email to marketing@openajax.org.

[edit]

Topic: How do people feel about Redmonk joining OpenAjax Alliance?

  • Our meeting minutes and wiki are fully open to them already
  • Would people feel uncomfortable saying things in phone calls if they were on the phone?
  • SC will talk about this on Thursday

Todd: Only 4 analysts at Redmonk

Jon: Michael Cote sent the request

Jon: Our conversations are all fully open to public. The only thing that an analyst or press would learn by attending meetings would be "off the record" comments that did not get into minutes.

Todd: Let's turn question around. What does Redmonk bring to us?

Jon: One could argue that they will have a more independent viewpoint where they haven't drunk the koolaid quite as much as the rest of us. So they can help ensure that our marketing messages are on target.

Todd: Any customers in Alliance?

Jon: A couple right now and hopefully more later. But it is likely that the customers who join will have drunk the koolaid also.

Shel: Does this set a precedent?

Jon: Yes

Shel: How do we feel about general question?

Todd: Does this open door to other analysts joining? Press? Maybe better to allow analysts than press. Don't see a negative for Redmonk. But what if lots of analysts and press join?

Jon: Maybe establish ground rules to which they must agree in order to join. If they don't follow ground rules, we boot them out.

Todd: I don't see a problem. Think it is fine.

Jim: I am ambivalent. Don't see a direct negative but not sure about participation without skin in the game.

Shel: Same.

(No objections raised to Redmonk joining)

[edit]

Topic: OK to add TIBCO's open source project to white paper?

Jon: My inclination is to say yes and make this a precedent. If a vendor goes open source with their technology, they get added to the list in the white paper.

Todd: Open source in general or just Ajax?

Jon: Just Ajax

Todd: How about another web page that lists open source projects. Note that Redhat is attempting to help organize and publicize open source efforts.

Jon: Our focus would only be on Ajax open source. Long-term, I hope we will post Web pages that break down Ajax providers, vendors and open source, via criteria, which allows customers to find the right provider for what they need. This will be a provocative topic, but let's push it off to 2007.

(Most everyone speaks up and agrees with listing TIBCO and establishing the precedent)

Todd: But a white paper should be considered a statement as of a given moment in time on a continual basis.

RESOLUTION: Postpone addition of new open source projects, such as TIBCO, until 2nd generation white papers are released. If TIBCO needs the change sooner, they can plead with Marketing committee.

[edit]

Topic: Ajax world article:

Todd: Whose byline?

Jon: All of AJAXWorld articles are bylined by individuals who contribute the article.

Todd: IBM or OpenAjax Alliance?

Jon: Jon of IBM, but for other activities, it has been Jon of IBM on behalf of OpenAjax Alliance.

JohnJ: That sounds good.

DavidF: What about my proposals about more robust discussion of SOA?

Jon: I agree with David's proposals. Hammering on SOA/Ajax relationship is good.

DavidF: Just a couple of sentences. If no objectives, then we can figure out the exact words.

DavidF: I reviewed the document and don't see any structural changes. Just word editing.

Mike: I only a couple of paragraphs on SOA, I commend you. Could have whole separate articles on the subject. Adding this would be a good lead into where things are headed.

Jon: I will make the changes as David suggests.

Jon: SAP and IBM will perform detailed editorial passes.

Jon: Anyone else have comments?

Mike: I will take a couple of editing passes.

[edit]

Topic: Incorporation of "compiled Ajax" into our white paper taxonomy

  • Punch line: "...We believe that 'compiled Ajax' is an appropriate (and popular) solution for a broad range of applications, and should be listed as a top-level classification supported/described by OAA. We're happy to sign up to add the appropriate material to the white paper if there's consensus around this."
  • How to do this? (Pursue an incremental update to Technical Overview White Paper?)

JohnJ: I have conferred with David Temkin about this. We have already submitted an outline of what we would like. What is the process for how to proceed?

Jon: Either make new wiki pages or modify existing wiki pages. I suggest modifying the existing technical white paper on the wiki, somehow highlighting the revisions that you are making versus what existed previously.

JohnJ: Try to do this in next couple of weeks.

Jon: Need it for 2nd generation white papers within 4th white paper on technology. Hopefully we can finish the 2nd generation in early 2007.

[edit]

Topic: Reaching out to other geos

(Jon simply reminds people of desire to get more international participation and asks people to add things to Upcoming Events wiki page.

[edit]

Topic: Encouraging Members to include OpenAjax Alliance Member logo as much as possible

Jon: Only thing holding up using the Members logo is the logo and trademarks web page approval, which should happen this week. So, people, please use the logo on your Web site and materials.

Retrieved from "http://www.openajaxalliance.org/member/wiki/Marketing_Minutes_2006-11-28"
Personal tools