Description

Right now the potential structure of the NodeJS+JSF Governance Structure (Stage 0) describes three entities for Projects that are supported by, or related to this organization:

• Incubator
• Sandbox
• Commons.js

Incubator

"An official process for a project to become a project and get representation in CPC. Mentorship from CPC + CommComm." – Entities that are 'on their way' to becoming a top-level project.

Sandbox

"A place for projects to live that want to benefit from being in the foundation but do not intend to graduate to a Top Level Project." – A 'neighboring' project that supports and is supported by the foundation.

Commons.js

"Resources and initiatives available to non-foundation projects. CI, travel scholarships, mentorship, etc." – Initiatives and/or projects that revolve around and affect/are affected by the foundation.

Problem

During a recent Joint Foundation Bootstrap Meeting, the consensus was against these names as representative monikers for those entities, and we need to find ones that represent what they are well.

Resolution

Let's come up with great names for these entities! 🙌

In the 2018-11-19 meeting, we discussed the need to address what the CPC actually looks like – what it does do, what it doesn't do, and so on – and identified that the shape of representation is more of an element of that.

As such, I've slightly tweaked the scope of this issue to provide a platform for that discussion in context of the CPC. So, what does the CPC consist of?

Original Content: Per the CommComm meeting, I wanted to kick off this discussion so that we could figure out how representation of projects and how membership in the CPC works.

Now that we're making good progress on the other topics, it's a good time to think about proposing a name for $Foundation.

I propose we meet separately to discuss this, since naming can be a time consuming process and we don't want to derail the progress being made in the main bootstrap discussions.

If you want to participate, +1 this issue and I'll add you to my list. When we get critical mass (hopefully in a few days or so), I'll work with you to find a good time for a call.

I can say with 100% confidence the outcome of this discussion will be one of the following:

• Use the Node.js Foundation name for the merged entity
• Use the JS Foundation name for the merged entity
• Come up with something new that's more appropriate

...I just can't say which one it'll be. So let's discuss and put together a proposal!

In the 2018-11-19 meeting, we discussed the need to address what the C3 actually looks like – what it does do, what it doesn't do, and so on – and identified that the shape of representation is more of an element of that.

As such, I've slightly tweaked the scope of this issue to provide a platform for that discussion in context of the C3. So, what does the C3 consist of?

Original Content: Per the CommComm meeting, I wanted to kick off this discussion so that we could figure out how representation of projects and how membership in the C3 works.

Time

UTC Mon 19-Nov-2018 19:00 (07:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-11-19&iso=20181119T19
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=07PM+UTC%2C+Nov+19%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15fbbXmeVVi4dqWLZPCvLOMlE0K4dUoRak7olr_ARAKw/edit?usp=sharing
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bfwCtj44TFkHFaDXS0_ZItTtbrSrjjrBKjHX73nxEj4/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-late-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Stage Advancement (5 minute timebox)

• doc: move governance to stage 2 #36
  • 5 minute timebox
  • possible to move to stage 3 / adopt

Update on progress (10 minute timebox)

• First Pass at Bootstrap Process #7
  • 5 minute timebox
• Create expectations for foundation draft #6
  • 5 minute timebox

Discussion (40 minute timebox)

• How often / when do we meet? #21
  • 5 minute timebox
• Drafting initial governance for merged foundation #33
  • 35 minute timebox

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors\n

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-late-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Hey All,

We are going to be holding an open town hall tomorrow, February 19th, at 2 p.m. ET to discuss the current state of the Node.js Foundation js + JS Foundation merger.

Please add questions to our google form

To Join:

https://zoom.us/j/362277753

Or iPhone one-tap :
US: +16699006833,,362277753# or +16465588656,,362277753#
Or Telephone:
Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 877 369 0926 (Toll Free) or +1 855 880 1246 (Toll Free)
Webinar ID: 362 277 753
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/axkB6o3Eo

**** CURRENTLY MANAGED IN PROJECT BOARDS ****

• BOOTSTRAP [closed] - https://github.com/openjs-foundation/bootstrap/projects/2
• POST-BOOTSTRAP - https://github.com/openjs-foundation/bootstrap/projects/3

HISTORICAL DATA

Issue to build list of checkboxed items we need to work on/progress

• Bootstrapping

  • New GitHub organization
  • Update all governance docs to reflect the name selected for the Foundation. (#126)
  • Initial email lists - #134
  • Confirm list of initial Impact projects and land as PROJECTS.md
  • Land Common Code of Conduct in OpenJS Foundation org - PR #147
  • Target for Initial CPC meeting (collaborator summit) #125
  • Checklist for projects (refs to OpenJS Foundation, changes for moderation etc.) #121
  • Work with projects to identify initial CPC representatives (deadline May 1?) #152
  • Create admin repo and land initial governance docs there [155] (#155) (Task done, deemed unnecessary, renaming the bootstrap repo to CPC and landing docs there)

• Post-bootstrap

  • Ask projects to start updating references to docs in admin repo (ex coc etc.)
  • New Zoom, Youtube etc.
  • Document/define initial process for handling reports to [email protected] (Manil has volunteered to make a first draft)
  • Review Foundation infrastructure and rethink how we manage it.
  • Move/update JSF cla-bot (see #124)
  • Project Directed Funding (#90)
  • Complete language for project exit clause (#96)
  • draft initial process for electing voting members from the non-impact projects. Nick/Michael to
  • Add entry point for projects wanting to join on README.md and review project progression (Jory will help with this one)
    work on that together.

The commons.js program (as discussed in #44 & other places) is an idea for non-foundation projects to take advantage of some foundation services. Since it is not part of the staging process (#88), it needs to be documented elsewhere, and I think that probably starts with a Stage 0 proposal 😄

Hey All,

I just made a boostrap team so people can have proper write access to this repo.

If there are no objections I'll add everyone who has so far attended a meeting.

Raise your hand if you would like to join.

As identified in #88, projects are able to move through different stages of the foundation on review. We also need language (somewhere) that describes the conditions and steps for when a project is exiting the foundation entirely for given reasons.

FWIW I don't think this belongs in the staging process, nor do I think this is a 'must resolve' prior to merge, but capturing the concern via issue seemed prudent.

Time

UTC Mon 21-Jan-2019 14:00 (02:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2019-01-21&iso=20190121T14
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=02PM+UTC%2C+Jan+21%2C+2019+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1897uLjZLCKK7sMf8ey5CggIpY_K0GGrhNV8IKLElSfs/edit
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KXvmsOJINCq9rYpziEz_PpC-U6dMTpDQEEJzzSyk38o/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Project Progression (7 minutes)

• proposal: Community Board Representation Stage 1 #72
  • 5 minute timebox
• proposal: SHARED_INTERFACES documentation effort #64
  • 1 minute timebox
• proposal: STANDARDS_OUTREACH meetings effort #63
  • 1 minute timebox

Discussion (45 minute timebox)

• Drafting initial governance for merged foundation #33
  • 20 minute timebox
  • refs:
    • What does the CPC look like? #37
    • Responsibilities Project Board
    • CPC Charter Proposal
    • proposal: Community Board Representation Stage 1 #72
• Define 'Open Governance' requirements for Top Level Projects #74
  • 15 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Project Progression Proposal
• Clarify Intentions around Project Codes of Conduct #75
  • 10 minute timebox

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

As mentioned in a previous CommComm meeting and raised again in the comments of the Joint Town Hall on Feb 19:

Jake Niemiec​: Question, In the node.js Jan 25, 2019 51:22 Comm Comm meeting, Michal D and Dan S indicated that gender identity and race would be a factor in membership. Is this still a goal?

Is equal representation in membership a goal and if so, what ways can we ensure that goal be met?

Please take a look at https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qUcvZz4wmQtwcWu9rWjxFNmWw5plD9-4_7mtvQvCegk/edit#slide=id.p which is a deck we can start to populate to brainstorm on what the structure of a merged foundation could look like. Once we do some iterations in the slides we can convert those to proposals that can move through our graduated system.

It currently outlines our most recent proposed structure:

• Board
• Cross Project Council (CPC)
• Cross Community Council (C3)
• Top-Level Projects
• Incubator
• Sandbox
• Commons.js

It also has a place for us to sketch out ideas regarding project lifecycle.

I'm adding the bootstrap-agenda item and think this is something we should focus a bunch of time into next Monday

Currently we have a weekly planned for 2:00 pm EDT. We could do alternating times to be more inclusive of those in different time zones. We could do a doodle, but there are way too many folks to really figure this out, so I'll make a proposal.

Alternating between 2:00pm EDT and 9:00am EDT

This goes early enough that those in EU will likely be able to take the meeting one of the meeting within business hours and not making those on the west coast get up far too early (although 6am is kind of gross).

Some questions we need to ask

• Do we have a team in github?
• How do people request to join?
• Membership requirements?
• How often / when do we meet?
• Who can attend meetings?

edit: some more thoughts

• What is the process for landing changes into this repo

edit 2:

Crossed out items we have consensus on

Hey All,

So tomorrow is a national holiday in both Canada and the USA, as we appeared to have consensus on the majority of topics necessary to draft the bylaws I think we can skip the meeting.

The foundations have been working on a draft that will be available very soon, in the meantime I've gone ahead and updated all the Stage-1 proposals to match what is going to be drafted and opened Pull Requests to move them to stage 2. Please chime in on those PRs to add your +1, or if anything seems out of place request changes.

The Node.js Board has a meeting on Friday where I hope we can get pre-approval to move all of these proposals to Stage-3. I believe the JSF has a meeting of sorts coming up soon as well, but I have also heard they are able to review this stuff out of band.

So assuming everyone gets their comments in before Friday, we should be able to land all of them as Stage-3 next Monday 🎉.

Community Board Reps to stage 2: #103
CPC Charter to stage 2: #100
Individual Membership to stage 2: #102

TL;DR (lmk if I missed anything important)

Community Board Reps

• 1 board seat for CPC
• 1 floating board seat
  • process for seat determined annually by CPC
  • requires 2 Platinum board members to activate
• 1 board seat for individual membership program
  • requires 2 platinum board members and 2000 program members to activate

CPC

• CPC is made up of
  • Voting members (2 members per Impact Stage project, 2 for non-Impact projects, and 2 nominated by
    regular members)
  • Regular members (any member of any foundation project an get added to list of regular members)
  • Observers (any member of any foundation project)
• All membership types can attend any meeting and participate in consensus process
• If there is a vote only voting members participate
• CPC has a chair and director (director attends board meetings)
• CPC has a second board seat that is allocated on an annual basis
• CPC sets foundation wide policy
• CPC is final authority to decide if projects join foundation
• CPC does not have control of technical direction of projects within the foundation
• CPC oversees budget for foundation projects
• CPC will charter a team to help with CoC escalations within foundation.

Individual Membership

• CPC will be chartered by board with administering the program (in bylaws)
• Program will have board seat that activates when:
  • there are 3 platinum directors
  • there are 2000 members registered in the program
• Program will initially have one membership type but will expand to 3 if program is successful

My background: JSF project owner (Mocha) and Node collaborator. I don’t participate in high-level governance of Node.js or either foundation.

Today (Oct 13) we had meeting(s) regarding the foundation merger at the Node.js collab summit. I didn’t know this meeting was scheduled, but took the opportunity to observe.

I had some notes/opinions which may or may not be of consequence, and in no particular order:

• The “top-level” JSF projects appear arbitrarily chosen by the ED based on criteria known only to the ED. I don’t believe the current standing of JSF projects should have ultimate bearing on where they land in a merged foundation.
• @hackygolucky mentioned the projects were offered a seat at the TAC or something? Not sure. Nobody from the JSF asked anyone from my project about involvement. My point is that we cannot assume the JSF projects are disinterested in this process. e.g., libuv may be disinterested in the workings of a foundation, but until somebody asks the JSF project leads, we won’t know.
• Mocha has historically few consistent contributors and is unlikely to ever attract a significant influx. But it’s relevant to the ecosystem and is growing in adoption. It wants to make use of foundation resources. I wouldn’t call it a candidate for the nursing home...but it’s not going to bring in much interest, corporate or otherwise. What of projects like this?
• JSF Projects have their own money from donations. I imagine the status quo is fine here, but some projects may need help from a foundation actually spending the money.
• Projects were strongly discouraged (or outright told no) from using a DCO. Please not this again. Write it in the bylaws that projects have a choice.
• Abysmal communication from JSF was pretty much expected, so the bar is set low. That said, nobody announced to the JSF projects that the discussion held today at the Node collab summit was going to happen and that they should attend (the town-hall was, however).
• Project mentorship was nonexistent. If a project fails, it should not be because the foundation failed to deliver on its promises. I’d argue for mentorship to be a core value, perhaps...
• There’s a lot of mistrust, frustration and disappointment (and apathy. and indifference) amongst JSF project owners. There may be happy ones, but I have not met any. Here, we will need to make extra effort to engage them. Show them we have something to offer. Their trust must be earned—not simply expected.

I probably won’t be involved in the process going forward, but felt welcome to offer my input (thanks). I hope this can be helpful—especially for those unfamiliar with the JSF—and used to productive ends. This is also just the opinion of one dude; I don’t claim to represent anybody else.

In summary from the Project Progression meeting this morning, the attendees are in general agreement that Open Governance should be a core value of top level projects.

The suggestion is to start with the JSF's Mentorship Program as a jumping off point (copied below, linked here

Mentorship

The purpose of mentorship is to support and mentor projects entering the
Foundation. The goal is for projects to be:

• Participatory
• Transparent
• Effective

While certain processes are strongly recommended based on the experiences of the
Foundation and its Projects, the goal of mentorship is not to enforce a specific
set of processes but to ensure that the processes adopted and accepted by a
project achieve these goals. Therefore, the requirements for graduating from
mentorship are based on metrics that demonstrate success in terms of these
values. These metrics are:

• Project's defined governing body is 5 members or greater
• No more than 1/3 of the defined governing body is affiliated with the same
  employer.
• No more than 1/3 of any Project is affiliated with the same employer.
• The decision making and release process is documented and publicly accessible.
• Other metrics as defined by the applying Project during the application
  process in cooperation with their mentor

A Project may apply to graduate from mentorship at any time by calling for a
vote in the TAC.

While a Project is under mentorship, it is assigned at least 1 [mentor][] who
is responsible for working with the Project to adopt policies and gain the
health and contributorship it will need in order to graduate from mentorship.
The mentor list is nominated and approved by the TAC and may be larger than the
TAC.

Time

UTC Mon 29-Oct-2018 18:00 (06:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-10-22&iso=20181022T18
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=06PM+UTC%2C+Oct+29%2C+2018+in+local+tim-

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XB-r3UoqyxLPUlDsZ0hW6DO5ljQHvZO2JqiNLE6nJdI/edit
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/168pPLkyEslfr728xdobUJiawQSwDZ6n0KMmpC5h9-MU/edit?usp=sharing

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Discussion

• Update from Legal:
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Discussion lead by Mike Dolan
  • Refs:
    • Question for Legal Committee: Node.js Trademark #25
    • Seek to understand and resolve foundation bylaw differences #8
• Governance of Bootstrap process
  • 20 minute timebox
  • Discussion lead by Jory + Myles
  • Refs:
    • Draft Staging Process #23
    • How often / when do we meet? #21
    • doc: initial governance #19
    • Guiding principles, concerns, general operations #9
    • doc: add vision and mission #1
    • How do we govern this group? #2
    • Add initial mission statement drafts from Governance Discussions #4
    • First Pass at Bootstrap Process #7
    • Decentralize Budget Authority #28
• Create expectations for foundation draft #6
  • 30 minute timebox
  • Discussion lead by tracy
  • Refs:
    • Do we want Board representation? #17
    • https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qUcvZz4wmQtwcWu9rWjxFNmWw5plD9-4_7mtvQvCegk/edit#slide=id.g44767ee714_0_79

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/868881095
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Over the past week I've been running an informal poll of @nodejs/tsc and @nodejs/community-committee members for the simple purpose of taking the "temperature of the room" with regards to the proposed merger. We had 29 responses, including 2 from non-TSC and non-CommComm members. I have removed the two non-top level committee member responses from the results. Note that there are currently 34 top level committee members so 27 is a solid representative sample. (Note that not every respondent provided answers to every question)

I will not provide the details of how each individual voted but the result charts are below along with a few notes...

76% of the respondents feel that they understand the goals of the proposed merger. 20% indicate that they do not. That's a pretty solid ratio.

Far more concerning is that 28% do not believe that the proposed merger will benefit Node.js (compared to 26% who believe that it will). Striking here is the 36% who are not yet sure. More on this in a bit.

In comparison, 72% believe that the proposed merger will benefit the JS Foundation projects, with 24% not sure.

52% believe that they understand the motivations for the timeline that has been proposed by the Boards for the merger. I think the more important bit here, however, is that the other 48% either aren't sure or do not understand the timing. My interpretation of this is that significantly more can be done to communicate the rationale for the proposed timing.

This is an interesting one, not only because the ratio of those who agree to those who disagree is effectively equal, but because only 36% of the respondents can say that they believe that the Foundation Board has adequately considered the needs of the project when evaluating the proposed merger.

This question is problematic for me. 57.7% of the respondents do not believe that the proposed merger would solve any existing problems in the Node.js project. More striking is that only 23% believe that it will.

Equally striking are the number of respondents who believe that Node.js must have representation on the Foundation Board. As has been pointed out in a different discussion, this does not address the question of why folks believe that representation is needed, but it will be critical to address this point.

Back on the issue of the timeline. Only 28% believe that the merger should proceed on the current timeline, 32% saying that it should not. Before we advance further along with the current agenda, it's going to be important to address this and take another look at the proposed timeline.

This particular question is interesting not necessarily because only 20% of the respondents believe that the proposed merger would be good for the Gold and Silver level member companies, but because nearly all of those who said that it would be good are employed by Platinum member companies.

This one goes along with the question about whether the proposed merger would solve any existing problems in the Node.js project. Only 20% believe that the merger would make it easier for the Foundation to provide additional resources to the project. Given that one of the arguments in favor of the merger has been that it would be easier to provide resources, there is obviously a discrepancy in expectations here that needs to be addressed.

The majority of respondents definitely have opinions about the proposed merger :-)

This is another striking response in that only 37.5% of the respondents believe that concerns have been adequately addressed. Whereas 33.3% believe that more can be done to address concerns and a significant 29.2% either aren't sure or don't have an opinion.

Overall, these results communicate that significantly more should be done to communicate the rationale, address the concerns, and establish the goals for the proposed merger among the Node.js top level committee members. The majority of Node.js top level committee members aren't yet seeing the benefits to the Node.js project but do recognize that the merger would likely be good for the JS Foundation projects.

Time

UTC Mon 25-Feb-2019 19:00 (07:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2019-02-25&iso=20190225T19
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=07PM+UTC%2C+Feb+25%2C+2019+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nfa51HK4y_J6wJOvh-rzcpWzzF4_ve4f1pK_oCVIKvw/edit?usp=sharing
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tj30zYWVeAhA3fdLLmD1lEJzbs01UbjalXMMSB_jhIo/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Proposal Advancement (15 minutes)

• CPC Charter
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • proposal: Move CPC_CHARTER to stage-2. #100
• Individual Membership
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • proposal: individual membership to stage-2 #102
• Community Board Representation
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • proposal: individual membership to stage-2 #102

Discussion (40 minutes)

• Name of $Foundation #84
  • 10 minute timebox
• draft proposal: language for project exit clause #96
  • 10 minute timebox
• Project Directed Funding #90
  • 10 minute timebox
• Next Steps
  • 10 minute timebox

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

At the moment this is a work in progress. As work progresses, updates will be posted here so people can follow its progress.

I'm starting by resolving formatting differences in the JS Foundation Bylaws and the Node.JS Foundation Bylaws. HTML formatted diffs of the results will be posted, and summaries of those diffs will be provided.

Obligatory disclaimer: anything we produce will need to be vetted, and potentially completely rewritten, by lawyers. That being said, a firm understanding of what does and does not belong in bylaws, and furthermore, a deep understanding of the two starting points will be invaluable in preventing much wasted effort and misunderstandings.

Examples of very early results (from the first ARTICLE):

• The names of the foundations are different (duh!)
• The principle offices are on different streets in San Francisco.
• The section on Additional Offices are identically worded.
• The section on Purpose should inform our discussion on Mission and Vision
• The JS Foundation has sought and obtained an exception from Federal Taxes, the Node.JS foundation has not (yet?) done so.

Outside of Section 4 ("Purpose"), there is little in ARTICLE I that will likely concern us. This will change as we get to later sections. Board representation (as explored in, for example, #6) has direct bylaws implications.

Time

UTC Mon 03-Dec-2018 19:00 (07:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-12-03&iso=20181203T19
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=07PM+UTC%2C+Dec+03%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w2ZGw6_rD8jDKAjSTxuIpyQyHoaJgNw2iKtaGjXZvc0/edit?usp=sharing
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14UdfVQRda-W0e3HfIShymLfrkohQfhfKmleQbG9jHnk/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Update on Progress (10 minutes)

• doc: initial version of CPC Charter #48
  • 5 minute timebox
  • build context and revisit in larger conversation later in meeting
• [WIP] PROJECT PROGRESSION #45
  • 5 minute timebox
  • build context and revisit in larger conversation later in meeting

Discussion (45 minute timebox)

• How often / when do we meet? #21
  • 5 minute timebox
• EXPECTATIONS stage 0 #41
  • 15 minute timebox
• Drafting initial governance for merged foundation #33
  • 25 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • What does C3 look like? #38
    • What does the CPC look like? #37
    • [WIP] PROJECT PROGRESSION #45
    • doc: initial version of CPC Charter #48

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

See openjs-foundation/summit#136 for discussion.

Opening and closing as an FYI that I've created a bootstrap-agenda label. We can use this to automate meeting agendas

Purpose of this checklist is to help onboard new projects as well as ensure that existing projects have updated their resources to reflect the new foundation:

• Select CLA or DCO
• Move / Update JSF cla-bot (see #124 )
• Use of OpenJS Foundation logo on website
• Reference 'PROJECT NAME' is an OpenJS Foundation Project'
• Disclaimer on any crowdfunding page
• transfer domains (+ other infra tasks)

...etc

This is a spin-off discussion from #12.

I would like to ask everyone in this group what kind of Board representation do we want or need. Currently the project has 3 Board seats: 1 CommComm Director, 1 TSC Director, 1 individual. The Board is currently composed of 10 members.
In a multi-project foundation, our current setup might not work.

Some questions from @rubys:

• Do we want only Node.js to have board representation?
• Do we want each and every project, no matter how big or how small, to have board representation?
• Do we want to have a single person to represent all projects?

If none of the above, what exactly do we want?

To this regard, I would kindly ask @MylesBorins @hackygolucky @jasnell @rvagg (as the directors that have been elected by the TSC/CommComm) to share their experience as directors.

Time

UTC Mon 04-Feb-2019 14:00 (02:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2019-02-04&iso=20190204T14
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=02PM+UTC%2C+Feb+04%2C+2019+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Vo1bmUSJqmMkUlqrWeZMNTbcM_HWiz3JApHNl2QNzIE/edit?usp=sharing
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U7RaOneI66EZbzqhAltzjtxtwftiM0G4TCxitannpCI/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Discussion (20 minutes)

• Project Directed Funding #90
  • 10 minute timebox
• doc: add initial CoC wording #80
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Clarify Intentions around Project Codes of Conduct #75

Proposals (35 minutes)

• CPC Charter
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • remove regular members from CPC charter #93
• Expectations
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • expectations to stage 2 #92
• Individual Membership
  • Refs:
    • individual membership to stage 1 #91
    • Create Individual Membership representation proposal #82
• Project Progression
  • 15 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Move to Stage 2 #88
    • Define 'Open Governance' requirements for Top Level Projects #74

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Time

UTC Mon 04-Mar-2019 14:00 (02:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2019-03-04&iso=20190304T14
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=02PM+UTC%2C+Mar+04%2C+2019+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l7hoJXaXaqFKRoLOEgPfXJuxTnGp9GoOpwz0qDhXVBs/edit?usp=sharing
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nfa51HK4y_J6wJOvh-rzcpWzzF4_ve4f1pK_oCVIKvw/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Proposal Advancement (5 minutes)

• Stage 3 proposals
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • proposals: Community Board reps to stage-3 #112
    • proposal: move individual membership to stage 3 #111
    • proposal: project progression to stage-3 #110
    • proposal: move expectations to stage 3 #108

Discussion (50 minutes)

• Name of $Foundation #84
  • 5 minute timebox
• Next Steps
  • 30 minute timebox
• draft proposal: language for project exit clause #96
  • 10 minute timebox
• Project Directed Funding #90
  • 10 minute timebox

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Time

UTC Mon 10-Dec-2018 14:00 (02:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-12-10&iso=20181210T14
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=02PM+UTC%2C+Dec+10%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19MyTh5B-pi6GpBQ_GbLvsddhITd-HWW0BzgI_GR_Foc/edit
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w2ZGw6_rD8jDKAjSTxuIpyQyHoaJgNw2iKtaGjXZvc0/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Approving PRs (2 minute timebox)

• doc: fix spelling in template #54
  • 1 minute timebox
• doc: update proposal template #53
  • 1 minute timebox

Proposals (15 minute timebox)

• proposal: town-hall to stage 0 #55
  • 3 minute timebox
• [WIP] PROJECT PROGRESSION #45
  • 3 minute timebox
• EXPECTATIONS stage 1 #41
  • 3 minute timebox
• doc: initial version of CPC Charter #48
  • 6 minute timebox

Discussion (35 minute timebox)

• Drafting initial governance for merged foundation #33
  • Refs:
    • Top Level Council(s) Shape and Focus #52
    • What does C3 look like? #38
    • What does the CPC look like? #37

For this section we are going to go through a design exercise to identify requirements of Top-Level Committees. We will capture these requirements in cards in a GitHub project and then attempt to figure out if they should be the responsibility of the CPC or C3.

• 5 minute discussion to update folks on where we are today
  • Current proposed governance structure
  • Current proposed Top-Level Committees
  • Current proposed community board representation
• 15 minutes of identifying requirements and responsibilities of the foundation
  • What are the community responsibilities of the foundation
  • What are the foundation responsibilities of the foundation
• 15 minutes of sorting the requirements
  • Which specific requirements and responsibilities will be managed by the Board
  • Which specific requirements and responsibilities will be managed by the CPC
  • Which specific requirements and responsibilities will be managed by the C3

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

In our project progression meeting this morning, we identified a gap in process/definition of expectations for codes of conduct. Specifically:

• do we allow projects to bring in their own codes of conduct, or require acceptance of our foundation CoC?
• where in the foundation is a 'CoC enforcement/support' team chartered?
• what is the expectation for that group in terms of enforcement of the CoC (proactive vs reactive monitoring for example)?

Time

UTC Mon 11-Feb-2019 19:00 (07:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2019-02-11&iso=20190211T19
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=07PM+UTC%2C+Feb+11%2C+2019+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tj30zYWVeAhA3fdLLmD1lEJzbs01UbjalXMMSB_jhIo/edit
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Vo1bmUSJqmMkUlqrWeZMNTbcM_HWiz3JApHNl2QNzIE/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Discussion (5 minutes)

• doc: add initial CoC wording #80
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Clarify Intentions around Project Codes of Conduct #75

Proposals (50 minutes)

• CPC Charter
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • remove regular members from CPC charter #93
• Expectations
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • expectations to stage 2 #92
• Individual Membership
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • individual membership to stage 1 #91
    • Create Individual Membership representation proposal #82
• Project Progression
  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Move to Stage 2 #88
    • Define 'Open Governance' requirements for Top Level Projects #74
• Next steps
  • 10 minute timebox
  • What’s next, what do we have to do?

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

There has been a lot of discussion around the responsibilities and structure of top level councils (CPC and C3) both formally (in meetings, issues and PRs) as well as informally (impromptu discussions). One looming question is “should there be two TLCs?”

Instead of prematurely optimizing, let’s instead look at what responsibilities we would expect of such a top level council and go from there.

From discussions, its become clear that there needs to be a balance between 1) a community oriented body with a low barrier to entry and broad participation encouraged and 2) an elected body empowered to make decisions on specific needs, for example, acceptance of projects into the foundation.

I propose we gather a list of expectations from such a top level committee, have the default option be the open community group and mark the expectations that need to be handled by an elected body as the exceptions.

To facilitate discussion and gather expectations more easily, I've created a Google Doc:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fp-4EEveuvlnPU0YWSOXCSSnEIcCgAHuTvy75yapYCw/edit?usp=sharing

I'd also like to propose that we dedicate a meeting to this topic, perhaps next week at the 2pm ET slot since the boostrap meeting will be at 9am ET that week. (Proposing Dec 10 2pm ET for discussion.)

Related issues and PRs:
#48
#37
#38

Time

UTC Mon 18-Mar-2019 13:00 (01:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2019-03-18&iso=20190318T13
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=01PM+UTC%2C+Mar+18%2C+2019+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UpJlOTlON6B587ge1SpOIqUMObGXO_BcPPgez6bHpzE/edit?usp=sharing
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l7hoJXaXaqFKRoLOEgPfXJuxTnGp9GoOpwz0qDhXVBs/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

nodejs/bootstrap

• doc: add responsibility for charter review #116
• proposal: move expectations to stage 3 #108
• Project Directed Funding #90
• Steps to bootstrap CPC and new Foundation #115

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Time

UTC Mon 05-Nov-2018 19:00 (07:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-11-05&iso=20181105T19
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=07PM+UTC%2C+Nov+05%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d2Hsf0J-pYTls2M_nPXhbLK8i0ZAg7ZP6Wa1sA4HdD8/edit?usp=sharing
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XB-r3UoqyxLPUlDsZ0hW6DO5ljQHvZO2JqiNLE6nJdI/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Discussion (50 minute timebox)

nodejs/bootstrap

• doc: initial governance #19
  • 5 minute timebox
• How often / when do we meet? #21
  • 5 minute timebox
• Draft Staging Process #23
  • 10 minute timebox
• Do we want Board representation? #17
  • 10 minute timebox
• Create expectations for foundation draft #6
  • 10 minute timebox
• First Pass at Bootstrap Process #7
  • Refs:
    • Guiding principles, concerns, general operations #9
  • 10 minute timebox

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors\n

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Time

UTC Mon 26-Nov-2018 14:00 (02:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-11-26&iso=20181126T14
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=02PM+UTC%2C+Nov+26%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14UdfVQRda-W0e3HfIShymLfrkohQfhfKmleQbG9jHnk/edit?usp=sharing
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/15fbbXmeVVi4dqWLZPCvLOMlE0K4dUoRak7olr_ARAKw/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Update on Progress (15 minutes)

• chore: Update README.md with repo description and jargon definitions. #40
  • 5 minute timebox
• doc: initial version of CPC Charter #48
  • 5 minute timebox
  • build context and revisit in larger conversation later in meeting
• [WIP] PROJECT PROGRESSION #45
  • 5 minute timebox
  • build context and revisit in larger conversation later in meeting

Discussion (40 minute timebox)

• EXPECTATIONS stage 0 #41
  • 15 minute timebox
• Drafting initial governance for merged foundation #33
  • 25 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • What does C3 look like? #38
    • What does the CPC look like? #37
    • [WIP] PROJECT PROGRESSION #45
    • doc: initial version of CPC Charter #48

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Time

UTC Mon 14-Jan-2019 19:00 (07:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2019-01-14&iso=20190114T19
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=07PM+UTC%2C+Jan+14%2C+2019+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KXvmsOJINCq9rYpziEz_PpC-U6dMTpDQEEJzzSyk38o/edit?usp=sharing
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TP1bFdIYV5DjbFOOBBIHOR2rZLyr6Zpet64TvmOsbzI/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Update on Progress (15 minutes)

• CPC Charter
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Proposal Readme
    • #65
• Project Progression
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Proposal Readme
• Expectations
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Expectations.md
• Community Board Representation Stage 1 #72
  • 5 minute timebox

Discussion (35 minutes)

nodejs/bootstrap

• Organize the next collaborator summit for $foundation, not just Node.js #58

• Drafting initial governance for merged foundation #33

  • 30 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qUcvZz4wmQtwcWu9rWjxFNmWw5plD9-4_7mtvQvCegk/
    • What does C3 look like? #38
    • What does the CPC look like? #37
    • proposal: Community Board Representation Stage 1 #72
    • Top Level Council(s) Shape and Focus #52
    • https://github.com/nodejs/bootstrap/projects/1
    • CPC Charter Proposal

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Time

UTC Mon 22-Oct-2018 18:00 (06:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-10-22&iso=20181022T18
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=06PM+UTC%2C+Oct+22%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/168pPLkyEslfr728xdobUJiawQSwDZ6n0KMmpC5h9-MU/edit?usp=sharing

Agenda

This is a tentative agenda put together based on open issues. Please chime in about changes you would like to see and I'll update this original post accordingly

Introductions (5 minute timebox)

• Quick introductions of everyone on the call

Discussion (50 minute timebox)

• Guiding principles, concerns, general operations #9
  • 20 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • doc: add vision and mission #1
    • How do we govern this group? #2
    • Add initial mission statement drafts from Governance Discussions #4
    • First Pass at Bootstrap Process #7
• the JSF #5
  • 10 minute timebox
• Seek to understand and resolve foundation bylaw differences #8
  • 5 minute timebox
  • focus on intent and how people can contribute
• Discuss what we are delivering end of month:
  • Refs:
    • Create expectations for foundation draft #6
  • 15 minute timebox
  • Focus on consensus around deliverable and schedule

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/304274848
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

UPDATE:

Date/Time: Monday, January 14 @ 12:00 p.m. EST
Agenda Link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JWfz34vBeTrdMGCkS20a3mi5z_QTN1sZvPW3-AyDZMc/edit?usp=sharing
Zoom Link:

Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://zoom.us/j/852050362

Or iPhone one-tap :
US: +16465588656,,852050362# or +16699006833,,852050362#
Or Telephone:
Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
US: +1 646 558 8656 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 855 880 1246 (Toll Free) or +1 877 369 0926 (Toll Free)
Webinar ID: 852 050 362
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/aeaFiskhPe

On today's call we discussed having a separate working session to address some of the open issues on the project progression proposal.

@mcollina, it would be especially helpful for you to be there as you have had more targeted feedback.

I'm suggesting Monday, January 14 at 9 a.m. for a call time - does that work for those interested? cc @bnb @brianwarner

Governance Breakout Session Takeaways

On Oct. 12th and 13th we hosted group Foundation Governance brainstorm sessions at the Collaborator Summit after Node+JS Interactive. The following are the contents of the sticky notes we plastered the conference walls with while ideating new joint Foundation Values and possible Programs.

Values

We identified four major values from our session:

Simplicity

• By-laws general enough not to require evolution
• Simple, project-driven governance evolution

Transparency

• Open Governance
• Radical Collaboration (different than radical transparency)
• Data over opinions
• Right to disagree and target resolving disagreement in decision making

Project Independence

• Value workers with large community on future direction – ex standards
• Ensuring health of highly used / critical libraries
• Recognition
• Championing new efforts
• Projects make all technical decisions
• Valuing project input for all decisions
• Make projects feel like a priority
• Ability to leave

Community Focus

• Bring members together on a regular basis with equal accessibility
• Be less US / North American centric (engage with communities / developers worldwide)
• Global Leadership (not based in San Francisco)
• Value moral values
• Welcoming and community focus
• Diversity and Inclusivity with a global perspective.
• Diversity, inclusion, representation

Programs

Programs that emerged from the session were grouped by the Foundation Value they most support. Programs would be administered by one or both of the Top Level Councils (CPC or C3). Each actionable program can conceivably go through the Program RFC Process defined in /programscurrently proposed in PR #7.

Supporting Value: "Community Focus"

• Budget for inclusivity programs / initiatives
• Contributor Covenant
• 360 deg Reviews (programs, management, etc)
• Outline representative / leadership expectations
• Code and Learn continues
• Program for clean communication / escalation
• Facilitated Code of Conduct
• CoC / Docs support ("docs in a box")
• CoC Escalation Support
• Moderation
• Reward / Appreciation program for project contributors
• Support & engage community members who are doing un-glorious work
• Regional Chapters

Supporting Value: "Transparency"

• Clear value proposition for Members
• OSS Grants program (needs basis)
• 3rd party grant application assistance
• Board + Project 1:1 Time
• Ticket Request System

Supporting Value: "Simplicity"

• Easy evolution process for governance / process
• Program for Program Proposals
• Standards Process Assistance (education, up-leveling, funding for participation)

Supporting Value: Project Independence

• Project Lifecycle
  • Requires well defined criteria for each step
  • Annual review of all projects
  • "Incubator" program for incoming projects
  • "Top-Level Projects" program for graduated projects
  • "Commons.js" program for non-top-level projects
  • "Hospice" care for older projects (What are the benefits?)
• Project collaboration as a program (?)
• Project presence on social media / ownership of social channels (federated account access)
• Comms assistance / promotion
• Infrastructure Support for Contracts / LSAs
• Project legal support

Major Outstanding Questions

• What is the full project lifecycle story?
• What is the definition of a "Program"?
• How do we measure Foundation work?
• How does earmarking work?
• Can Individual Membership funds be earmarked?
• How do we measure the success of the Foundation?
• How do we measure the success of a Program?
• What are the non-goals of the Foundation?
• What is our scope? JS? Web? Tech? "A JS Angle"?
• What is the worst-case scenario Bootstrap vote model if full consensus can't be reached?

Ideas on Bootstrap Group Functionality

• Temporary Merge Program Manager
• Bootstrap workgroup should serve the interest of the projects, not the board.
• Goal: Minimum Viable Foundation to vote on and move to
• What are the strategic objectives of the new org for Q1-Q4 2019?
• Don't bikeshed on the name for now.
• Perfect is the enemy of done.
• PREMATURE OPTIMIZATION IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL (yes, in all caps 😉)
• Design the flow of information through the org
• Publish the key roles & responsibility of the org (ED, CPC Chair, etc)

Time

UTC Mon 17-Dec-2018 19:00 (07:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-12-17&iso=20181217T19
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=07PM+UTC%2C+Dec+17%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iryZ7TcPQ153klYsJBybTigIjlNdTiOtowiQQdXFuWc/edit
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19MyTh5B-pi6GpBQ_GbLvsddhITd-HWW0BzgI_GR_Foc/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Update on Progress (10 minutes)

• doc: initial version of CPC Charter #48
  • 5 minute timebox
• [WIP] PROJECT PROGRESSION #45
  • 5 minute timebox

Discussion (45 minutes)

• Organize the next collaborator summit for $foundation, not just Node.js #58

  • 10 minute timebox

• Drafting initial governance for merged foundation #33

  • 15 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qUcvZz4wmQtwcWu9rWjxFNmWw5plD9-4_7mtvQvCegk/

• Top Level Council(s) Shape and Focus #52

  • 20 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • What does C3 look like? #38
    • What does the CPC look like? #37
    • https://github.com/nodejs/bootstrap/projects/1

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Time

UTC Mon 28-Jan-2019 19:00 (07:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2019-01-28&iso=20190128T19
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=07PM+UTC%2C+Jan+28%2C+2019+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U7RaOneI66EZbzqhAltzjtxtwftiM0G4TCxitannpCI/edit
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1897uLjZLCKK7sMf8ey5CggIpY_K0GGrhNV8IKLElSfs/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Discussion (55 minute timebox)

• Individual Membership

  • 25 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Create Individual Membership program proposal #81
    • Create Individual Membership representation proposal #82

• Codes of Conduct

  • 10 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • doc: add initial CoC wording #80
    • Clarify Intentions around Project Codes of Conduct #75

• Define 'Open Governance' requirements for Top Level Projects #74

  • 10 minute timebox

• Name of $Foundation #84

  • 10 minute timebox

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Just a Quick heads up. The next two Monday's are holiday (Christmas Eve + New Years eve). We are currently no planning to have meetings on those dates. The next scheduled meeting will be January 7th at 9am ET.

@joesepi has suggested they may hold some breakouts between now and the next scheduled meeting, they will open up a different issue to manage that.

Hey All,

We have been having a weekly meeting with stakeholder from both the Node.js and JSF boards since we begun conversations about the intent to merge. After today's meeting we wanted to offer the timeslot to this group, specifically so that we could have a time for a meeting where collaborators from various projects and representatives of both foundations boards could collaborate.

One of the biggest pieces of feedback I took from the collaborator summit was that we don't want things to feel like they are happening in a black box, and it would seem to me that having a weekly meeting with all stakeholders is going to be our best option for reaching consensus in a transparent way.

The meetings take place every Monday at 2pm EDT (11 am PDT). While the meetings up until this point have been private, we would like to move them to be publicly broadcast and recorded on YouTube as we do with all other project meetings. We would also keep public notes.

Is this something that people participating in the bootstrap committee would be interested in? I know the governance, including meeting times, are just being fleshed out, but it seems like a great opportunity to take advantage of a timeslot that is already booked off on a large number of calendars. We regularly get 8 - 10 people in this meeting, with representation from the JSF board, the Node.js foundation board, and the Linux Foundation.

Time

UTC Mon 12-Nov-2018 14:00 (02:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-11-12&iso=20181112T14
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=02PM+UTC%2C+Nov+12%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bfwCtj44TFkHFaDXS0_ZItTtbrSrjjrBKjHX73nxEj4/edit
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d2Hsf0J-pYTls2M_nPXhbLK8i0ZAg7ZP6Wa1sA4HdD8/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Approving PRs (3 minute timebox)

• Draft Staging Process #23
  • 3 minute timebox

Stage Advancement (3 minute timebox)

• Governance stage 1 #32
  • 3 minute timebox

Update on progress (4 minute timebox)

• First Pass at Bootstrap Process #7
  • 2 minute timebox
• Create expectations for foundation draft #6
  • 2 minute timebox

Discussion (45 minute timebox)

• How often / when do we meet? #21
  • 5 minute timebox
• Drafting initial governance for merged foundation #33
  • 40 minute timebox

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors\n

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

Preface

Input on matters like board representation of projects tends to reflect individuals experiences with how one or both of the existing foundations' boards have operated in the past, as well as expectations as to how a merged board would operate.

Fortunately, we don't need to continue to operate as we have done in the past.

This issue extracts a cross-cutting concern (budget) and describes a different model of operating that has been time tested and seems to produce more feeling of individual empowerment and accountability than either of Node.js or JS foundation structures provides today.

Output of this discussion will inform matters like bylaws and charters.

Overview

In the ASF, President is a volunteer, non-board position that is responsible for operations, including budget. Reporting to the President is a number of officers each of which potentially owns a budget. Budgets are approved annually, come with a scope, and an authorization amount.

Current list of officers:

• Brand Management
• Fundraising
• Marketing and Publicity
• Infrastructure
• Conferences
• Travel Assistance
• Finance

Additional line items (tracked by, but not reporting into, the President)

• Treasury
• General & Administrative
• Chairman's discretionary

Potentially, every Project (and in the ASF this would include the Incubator and Community Development), has an officer who can own a line item, but in practice we have never done this.

Officers tend to have committees that support them, which may be a mix of volunteers and paid staff. The model we strive for is volunteers for oversight and setting direction, and paid staff when there is a demonstrable need for timely response. Volunteers may join or leave a committee without involving either the board or the President. It is up to committees to determine how this operates.

Officers themselves are named by the board or the President, depending on the reporting structure. The President and EVP are named by the board, and need not be members of the board (and I would argue it is advantageous for them not to be, but people's opinion on this differ).

How this works

Annually, we do a five year plan. This is where the board provides the most direct input, and is involved in setting strategic goals for the foundation. This is done in conjunction with line item owners. My recommendation is that we start this with the second year of the merged foundation.

Annually (typically 3 to 6 months after the five year plan is approved), the line item owners draft one year budgets with both scope and authorization. The President gathers up these inputs and presents them to the board for ratification. Typically, this gets unanimous approval as the strategic goals have been set.

When Bills come in, Line Item owners approve them; Accounting verifies the approval and schedules the payment, and the Treasurer releases the payment. Being geeks, this information has traditionally been done through version control systems (SVN), but we are exploring moving this to GSuite or other systems.

Monthly, the board gets reports from the Treasurer and the President. These reports include both this month's and YTD budget vs actual income and expense by line item. These reports (elided occasionally when specific vendors are mentioned) are posted online.

Commentary

• While the ASF is a 501(c)(3) non-profit and both the Node.js and JS Foundations are 501(c)(6) business leagues, a model where the board sets long term direction and oversees that expenditures are spent according to plan but otherwise delegates both the short term planning and day to day execution to others could work for both. The process described above provides plenty of insight to members as to how their monetary donations are being spent, and data for things like annual and quarterly reports that can be shared with potential new members.

• The ASF has never had an Executive Director. At times, this is a matter of vigorous debate. The crux of the matter is that the President's job is to delegate and therefore isn't a time consuming job when things go smoothly, but observationally it is rarely the case that things go smoothly.

• Officers (and their committees) have both oversight and autonomy. They produce a detailed plan which is reviewed by the President and ratified by the board, and then executed in conjunction with accounting and the Treasurer, and monitored by the board.

• Projects don't tend to have direct representation. In contrast to a model where a project has a single representative on the board who is responsible for input on every operational and strategic matter, resulting in direction that is handed down, the ASF's model enables every individual on a project to participate in a committee (or even be an officer) in the areas that they are interested in.

  So Travel Assistance would, for example, gather together a list of events for the year from the people who show up to the committee, produce a plan, and once the plan is ratified, execute on that plan - handling things like obtaining Visas and working with Travel Agencies.

  Conferences deals with hotels and producers. Marketing deals with the Press. Brand Management deals with lawyers. Etc. Each open to participation by interested members of projects, but largely offloading this responsibility and letting projects focus on code development.

Hey All,

It appears the next meeting has a conflict with MLK Jr. Day in the united states which is a federal holiday. Wanted to get a pulse for who would still be able to attend. Can you respond to this post with emoji so we can get an idea if we should cancel the meeting

👍🏽 ~ I'll Make it
👎🏽 ~ I can't Make it

Time

UTC Sun 07-Jan-2018 14:00 (02:00 PM):

Or in your local time:

• http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Node.js+Foundation+Bootstrap%20Team+Meeting+2018-01-07&iso=20180107T14
• or http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=02PM+UTC%2C+Jan+07%2C+2018+in+local+time

Links

• Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TP1bFdIYV5DjbFOOBBIHOR2rZLyr6Zpet64TvmOsbzI/edit
• Previous Minutes Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iryZ7TcPQ153klYsJBybTigIjlNdTiOtowiQQdXFuWc/edit

Agenda

Extracted from bootstrap-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

Update on Progress (15 minutes)

• CPC Charter
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Proposal Readme
    • #65
• Project Progression
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Proposal Readme
• Expectations
  • 5 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • Expectations.md

Discussion (40 minutes)

• Organize the next collaborator summit for $foundation, not just Node.js #58

  • 10 minute timebox

• Drafting initial governance for merged foundation #33

  • 30 minute timebox
  • Refs:
    • https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qUcvZz4wmQtwcWu9rWjxFNmWw5plD9-4_7mtvQvCegk/
    • What does C3 look like? #38
    • What does the CPC look like? #37
    • Top Level Council(s) Shape and Focus #52
    • https://github.com/nodejs/bootstrap/projects/1
    • CPC Charter Proposal

Invited

• Node.js Members: @nodejs/members
• JSF Project Maintainers
• JSF TAC
• Node.js Foundation Board of Directors
• JSF Board of Directors

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with bootstrap-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

• link for participants: https://zoom.us/j/779273015
• For those who just want to watch: https://www.youtube.com/c/nodejs+foundation/live

@hackygolucky @MylesBorins ... Can either of you please get an answer to the following question:

Is Joyent's grant to the management of the Node.js trademark exclusive to the Node.js Foundation? In other words, if the Node.js project decided to leave the current Foundation for any reason and move to a new similarly classed non-profit organization, could it negotiate it's own agreement with Joyent for use of the trademark?

I believe getting an answer to this question would be helpful in helping to address part of the reasons why Node.js top level contributors believe a board seat is required.

(forked from the discussion in #17)

update from @MylesBorins:

the OpenJS Foundation now has an official process for Project Directed Funding. This is specifically focused on member organizations directing funding to support a specific project in the foundation. We are still working on how to best support the variety of crowd-funding platforms that projects may want to utilize, and will have an update related to that in the future

On today's bootstrap call we indirectly brought up the question of whether and how a company could direct funds to specific projects via the Foundation. I took the action item to file the discussion issue. As I understand it, neither foundation has a clear way of addressing this need (JSF attempted to handle this with a 'domains' concept, but I don't know if this was ever tested).

Do organizations want to be able to direct funds explicitly to certain projects? If so, how?

I think this will be a dynamic problem to tackle, so I'm not recommending that we attempt to solve it prior to executing the merge documents. It also has potential implications for members, projects and the foundation's business model, so I'd like to suggest we form a representative committee to explore the issue once the new $Foundation's activities are underway.

Thoughts?