[Advisors] Updates and Next Steps

John Mark Walker jowalker at redhat.com
Thu May 16 17:13:53 UTC 2013

----- Original Message -----
> Completely agree with this sentiment.
> And completely happy for the definition to be that essentially the Board
> exists to safeguard the assets (trademarks, etc) of the foundation and
> ensure that it continues delivering on its mission, but doesn't meddle in
> the technical/business end of the software projects themselves. (actually -
> that is exactly the way I think it should be)

That is the intent here. The Gluster Community Board will not meddle in the technical operations of the project, except to determine if they reach the criteria for graduation. 

> And for the record, I think corporate-sponsored/controlled projects can be
> done well. (I'll happily cite Fedora - which I think has generally shown
> incredibly good stewardship and generally precious little corporate
> meddling) They can also be done abominably as in some of the examples that
> you cite, and they can also be done with the best of intentions, but with
> results that make one go 'meh'. But I do think that it is important to know
> what the standing is. Fedora, for instance,  makes that perfectly clear in
> the person of the FPL who has absolute veto power over anything in the
> project as being the 'control' that is able to be exerted by RHT - though it
> is incredibly rarely used, because I think there was recognition that giving
> up 'control' results in greater investment by others. That's a fine solution
> for that particular problem.


> Anyway, sorry for taking that segue - let me ask  a question that is more to
> the point. What/who is the legal entity that is assuming the risk behind the
> operations of the project? This, in my experience, determines where the real
> boundaries are, because that underlying organization has obligations,
> typically legal or regulatory, that necessarily impact the project, albeit
> in hopefully small ways. And if it is the primary sponsor, there also
> becomes a point at which it becomes no longer in the business interest of
> that sponsor to continue operations.

Yes, Red Hat assumes the legal risk. 

As for business interests, it's pretty well-known inside Red Hat that the success of the Gluster community is absolutely essential to the success of Red Hat Storage.


More information about the Advisors mailing list