[Members] Re: 10,000 ft level protocol overview

Hal Rottenberg halr9000 at gmail.com
Sat Oct 22 09:02:59 CDT 2005

Thanks Mickael and everyone else for the feedback, as well as the few
replies I got off-list.  Ok, so the idea seems sound so far, and worth
pursuing.  What's missing now is a few opinions from the Council.  I
really think that these "workgroups" we'll call them, need to have an
individual that is held accountable.  Doesn't mean you need to do all
the work.  It just means you need to know to some extent what the goal
is of a workgroup, and can put a word in here and there to nudge the
workgroup towards that end.  Also this Council sponsor will be the
point-of-contact when we have a) a prospective developer (or any
contributor really) or b) someone outside of the Jabber community who
wants to help, or as in my previous example, give lots of money.

Hmm, maybe they should be called JIGs...


On 10/22/05, Mickael Remond <mickael.remond at erlang-fr.org> wrote:
> I think this resemble what you are proposing. The JSF could reinforce
> the idea of thematic workgroups where projects could work transversaly
> regarding to existing JEP (and also help to orient people wanting to
> work on a particular topic to the relevant JEP).
> Did I understand correctly your proposal ?

Psi webmaster (http://psi-im.org)
im:hal at jabber.rocks.cc

More information about the Members mailing list