[Members] 2013 Board and Council Elections - questions for candidates

S Moonesamy sm+xsf at elandsys.com
Tue Oct 15 01:04:44 UTC 2013


Hi Peter,

Many thanks for the thoughtful comments.

At 16:29 14-10-2013, Peter Waher wrote:
>My thoughts on what the board of directors could/should do the coming year:
>
>XMPP is one of many technologies and proposals under consideration 
>in various emerging areas of development (some overlapping more than 
>others), such as the Internet of Things, Semantic Web, Smart Cities, 
>Grid Computing, Machine-to-Machine communication, distributed 
>networking, social networking, etc. While the council can work to 
>make XMPP better suited for any one area of development, the XSF 
>Board of directors should work to make (or help to make) these 
>solutions known in the world outside of the XSF, and connect 
>interested parties from different groups together, with the aim of 
>promoting XMPP as a versatile protocol, but also to learn from other 
>emerging technologies.

In my individual opinion the above would require a long term 
approach.  The XSF Board could, for example, interface with the 
external parties already involved in the above areas.  It doesn't 
have to be a Board-only activity.  I'll suggest coordination and 
collaboration through focus groups.

>Furthermore, I would like to see the board of directors, in a 
>transparent manner, informing the XSF about such work taking place, 
>actively working with the council in particular and the XSF in 
>general to spread the word inside the organization, once original 
>contact with other parties has been made. Today, much of this 
>information is shared only in chat rooms and chat logs.

I gather that there is an assumption that chat rooms and chat logs 
are adequate for dissemination of information internally (with XSF 
members).  I suggest regular reporting using email.  I would 
encourage members to ask questions as that is the better way to 
ensure transparency.

>Furthermore, much work done on/with XMPP is done in silence, i.e. 
>outside of the knowledge of the XSF. The reason must be because it 
>is not clear to everybody, that the XSF can help interested parties 
>to develop technologies (or act as a sounding board) for their 
>particular needs. Developing extensions together with the XSF can 
>only improve the usability of the extension, or inform parties of 
>parallel work. Many choose to implement "proprietary extensions", 
>which will work fine, but the work is lost from the perspective of a 
>broader audience. Also, there are many misconceptions about XMPP and 
>what it can and cannot do outside of the XSF.

The first part is about a lack of information about what the XSF does 
or can do.  The mission says promote XMPP as an open protocol.  It is 
not clear to the outside world what that means.  One of the points in 
the above is what is happening out there XMPP-wise.  In my opinion it 
would be good if the XSF could bring that external information 
together for its members.

>I would also like to see a more active presence in social networks 
>or forums where these things are discussed. Board members might 
>invite experts from the XSF to joins threads, where the board sees a 
>need to promote XMPP, both conceptually and  technically. Today, 
>much of such communication is done by enthusiasts only, and is often 
>misinformed.

That would be cross-fertilization.  The above could be tied into the 
effort to look into various emerging areas (see above).

>It is also important for the board to make sure published 
>information (on the web page and wiki pages) is up to date.

Agreed.

>In order for the board to make sure the above can be accomplished, 
>it needs to better delegate responsibilities to more members, and 
>perhaps create clear working groups for specific fields of interest, 
>and so divide the work load. XMPP has outgrown what is possible for 
>any single individual to completely master. People can be experts in 
>some fields, but not in all. The organization needs to reflect this, 
>both organizationally and in its manner in which responsibilities is 
>accordingly delegated. Correctly identifying such areas if interest 
>by the board is thus of utmost importance for the successful growth 
>and promotion of XMPP.

I have been thinking about dividing the work load and 
responsibilities.  There is one XSF work team at the moment.  I 
suggest having more teams with clear objectives and metrics to assess 
what has been done.  It would be useful to look at all this from an 
organizational perspective.  It is important for an organization to 
ensure continuity.  At the same time one should not go overboard with 
too much formality as it is easier to do ground work in an informal manner.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy  



More information about the Members mailing list