Board/Minutes/2020-10-S2S/Creating software dispute resolution panel

From OpenStreetMap Foundation
< Board‎ | Minutes‎ | 2020-10-S2S
Revision as of 18:56, 16 October 2020 by Dorothea (talk | contribs) (Created page with "<font color="blue"> Notes by participants. Might be enriched. </font> ''This session took place in parallel with "Board/Minutes/2020-10-S2S/Legal_team_and_Brexit_implicatio...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Notes by participants. Might be enriched.

This session took place in parallel with "Legal team and Brexit implications - resolve how to respond". A summary was provided to the other group.

Participants

Board members

  • Mikel Maron
  • Tobias Knerr
  • Rory McCann
  • Paul Norman
  • Allan Mustard

The rest of the board members participated in the parallel session "Legal team and Brexit implications - resolve how to respond".

Biographies.

Notes

Objective

  • Steps to selecting composition of this group
  • Choose something people will trust can come to resolution ([name=Rory])

Data Working Group (DWG) offer

  • Allan: DWG say they are overloaded already. Software different from data integrity. Lack of geographic diversity in the group.
  • Mikel: the DWG works on a task assignment basis, rather than deliberative body
  • Paul: why did we ask the WGs? most tagging issues shouldn't be raised to a dispute
    • Mikel > community asked. intention was to receive interest and then assess.
  • Rory: DWG has relevant experience, but we'd need to see a concrete proposal. Is geodiversity that much of an issue for resolving these disputes?
  • Tobias: skepticism of appointment vs some way of earning responsibility. so lean towards known group. geodiversity historically not main cause of disputes (producer v consumer, different use cases)

Options

  • Give to DWG.
    • Rory: could help increase DWG membership.
    • Mikel: unsure about how membership selection works in DWG.
    • Tobias: could give it to DWG with charge to make a subgroup.
  • Have DWG make nominations.
  • Invite nominations from DWG and from wider community.

How to select

  • Rory: Board would need to vote on the composition. With five people selected, then we can practically determine its make up.
  • Allan: We need to assess past work and reputation of these folks to see that they will do well. Look at their application.

Decision

  • Allan will start drafting a document with questions to the Data Working Group (DWG) about what their implementation could look like. We're still seeking a proposal, and still holding the decision

Action items

  • Allan to start online document with intention to send in 1 week.

Pending issues, not addressed

  • how will the panel ultimately be composed?
  • who else will be interested to join?