[Kamailio-Devel] openser board summary

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello guys,

first I apologize for the situation we are in and for my silence in the 
last days as I tried to get the release out and not put gas on fire. The 
board looks like being now an evil thing, maybe it is our fault we 
haven't given more details about insights, but there were not many as 
ones could imagine and the decisions were presented to community.

Here are the outlines of the discussions on the board, since September 
2005, when first mail came there:

2005-09
DCM: decide release number => resulted in openser 1.0.0
DCM: business mailing lists => resulted in creation of the list
2005-10
AG: asks about making AG a trusted CA for default delivery of openser => 
self signed or something invalid to force users to change
2005-11
DCM: starts discussion about making an openser statute
DCM: puts in dicussion the behavior of Harry on the mailing lists
DCM: contacts Harry
2005-12
ALL: continuation of previous mail discussions
2006-03
DCM: plans for new release
2006-04
JH: discussion about presence implementation
2006-05
BIA: about project hosting: still sourceforge or move out
ALL: Sourceforge problems discussions
JH: presented some options for hosting
2006-06
AG: sip summer code
JH: about 1.1.0
2006-07
JH: presence server
AG: minutes if SIMPLE WG at IETF
DCM: GPL issue with openssl and debian
2006-08
BIA: openser summit
2006-09,10
ALL: openser summit
2006-11
AG: history update in relation with old project
BIA: TLS discussion
2006-12
ALL: history update
2007-01
KD: FOSDEM
DCM: openser 1.1.1
BIA: openser at spring von
2007-02
BIA: openser donnations
DCM: openser events
2007-04
BIA: Linuxtag
2007-09
DCM: summit 2007
2007-10
CS: retires from board
BIA: proposes Henning => no decision as no rules for electing, makes 
that a point in todo
BIA: openser 1.2.3
2007-11
DCM: openser business environment => hosting it within the website 
couldn't get a decision, posponed with alternative for dedicated site
BIA: new developer Maxim Sobolyev
2008-03
BIA: on the 28th announces to board the issues with trademark, 
apparently some board member and other people were already aware
AG: openser pages update
2008-04
ALL: agreed with rename
- started the idea of a foundation to register trademark, takes on 
managing resources
HW (not a member at that time but was included in the discussions 
related to TM) - proposes new developer Iouri
2008-05
BIA: on the 12th started the discussion about new name foreseeing 2 
directions: something similar, to remember about the old project, or 
something totally different

2008-06
DCM: 9th: paypal report for last year => total donations to project's 
sourceforge account 52.05Euro (DCM Paypal account closed, the money 
still at DCM, proposed to use them for buying domains for new name)
DCM: 9th: forwards a proposal received at end of April to 
team at openser.org from PacktPub to donate 2% or 5% (if we keep news on 
the site about the book) of openser book sales to the project. DCM asked 
for decision as there was no legal entity to deal with. (note: 
team at openser.org was created at the time openser forked in 2005, to get 
private feedback at that time, was used for the summit 2006 for contact, 
open for any post, includes the founders, about 10 good mails out of 
thousands spams per year)
BIA: 9th: adds that in a discussion with PacktPub (not on team or board, 
as I haven;t seen such) proposed to give the 5% for openser devel course 
organized by him. The course was announced to the lists on the 4th of June.
DCM: 9th: expressed surprise as he thought that was a different deal, 
made privately between BIA and PacktPub
BIA: ask the board about donation, saying that actually the 5% donation 
was not really accounted
ALL: There was no decision of what to do with the sponsorship as the 
board has no treasurer and we are working towards creating a foundation 
that can accept legally fundings. There was no ask for some amount of 
money for the devel course, no costs presented, no other details given. 
Nobody expressed a disagreement of giving funds for the devel course.

BIA: 9th : replacement for Cesc as quick solution to deal with TM => 
suggests Henning Westerholt, all the other agree up to 17th
DCM: asks Henning and then sends short announcement to community
BIA: complains that he actually hasn't voted and the replacement was 
made in hurry (?!?!)
DCM: presents that all other announcements were done more or less in the 
same fashion in the past, asking to propose improvements
DCM: 24th - asks decision about local_route, board discusses and agrees 
to enclose in #ifdef
HW: 25th - announces the result and asks BIA if he agrees, no response, 
he was away
HW: after 1 day since asking BIA for agreement SVN is updated enclosing 
local_route in ifdefs
BIA: 27th - disagrees with board decision, considering it was not the 
business of the board (sent to public as well)
-- Note from DCM: opensips was registered at June 25, 2008, 17:30 
according to http://sourceforge.net/projects/opensips/
Discussions with name proposals and foundation

2008-07
Others: discussions related to name and foundation
HW: proposes a project renaming plan
HW: on the 16th, vote for name: proposes Kamailio, majority reached on 
the 17th, last that agree (with a mention that he does not really like 
the name) BIA, on the 28th, after a call from HW where he mentioned he 
was away.
AG: 17th - registers kamailio.org, ...
AG: prposes unification of 1.4. and renaming => decided to announce 
first to allow time for renaming without pressure
AG: 28th - announces renaming to public
HW: some drafts of foundation if in Germany
AG: details about alternative in Netherlands

2008-08
DCM: 4th - discovers news on voip-info.org that openser becomes 
opensips, Dan Pascu sends a mixed recipient message and some others see 
something is going on
DCM: after short investigation and learning that behind opensips is 
bogdan decide to take some precaution actions and send details about 
them on board to decide if they still remain or roll back
BIA: comes later on the mailing lists and announces the fork
 From then on most of the things were reflected on the public. No one 
was kicked out from the project, as developer, board member or simply 
list user, just some administrative rights were limited.

Of course last three months have a lot of messages for the topics above. 
I hope I haven't missed something important and I ask other board 
members to correct or improve. With this one I hope things are a bit 
more clear about what board did so far, where were mistakes and wrong 
decisions. You judge!

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com