[Owasp-board] OWASP Project Committee

johanna curiel curiel johanna.curiel at owasp.org
Wed Sep 17 19:37:36 UTC 2014


Josh

Sure

 I think the best  is to create a list of requirements for participation
and then we can publish this through the Community-leader list.
I also want as much as transparency from beginning and during the
participation of the committee, because I alone cannot run this. Alone
means is Is not transparent , nor democratic ,neither sustainable in the
long run.

regards

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:

> Johanna,
>
> If you would prefer to make the announcement on the OWASP community list
> to elaborate on what you are looking for from committee members, I think
> that would be acceptable.  The goal here is to provide transparency in the
> committee creation and provide everyone with an opportunity for membership
> from the start.  Also, to ensure that there is an adequate number of
> participants to keep committee activities afloat.
>
> ~josh
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 11:55 AM, johanna curiel curiel <
> johanna.curiel at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> So, since last night we established majority support, no arguments
>> against, no conflict, and in-line with OWASP goals, now we (the Board) need
>> to make a public call for OWASP members interested.
>>
>> Hi Josh,
>> Could it be possible that we emphasize that members that want to be part
>> of the committee, should be actively involved?
>>
>> Sometimes people have the tendency to not read the entire document,
>> however I find important that we highlight is. Bottom line: You want to be
>> a member, you must be active. I think the potential bottlenecks of
>> committees is this, that people become inactive and at a certain moment
>> there is not enough participation of other members.
>>
>> If that could be the case, then unfortunately I would have to step back
>> from the committee and my work involved in it. That is how I interpret  the
>> committee rules. Please let me know if I'm interpreting this correctly
>>
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Johanna
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> To summarize the process:
>>>
>>> Step 1) Johanna made the proposal - COMPLETE
>>> Step 2) Community discussion - COMPLETE
>>> Step 3) Perceived majority support and no major arguments against -
>>> COMPLETE
>>> Step 4) Board established no conflict and in-line with OWASP Goals -
>>> COMPLETE
>>> Step 5) The BOARD initiates a public call for OWASP members interested
>>> in committee membership via the OWASP community mailing list.  There is a 7
>>> day window for this call. - WE ARE HERE
>>> Step 6) As long as there are at least 5 applicants, the Board votes on
>>> the creation of the committee.
>>>
>>> So, since last night we established majority support, no arguments
>>> against, no conflict, and in-line with OWASP goals, now we (the Board) need
>>> to make a public call for OWASP members interested.
>>>
>>> ~josh
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 4:15 AM, johanna curiel curiel <
>>> johanna.curiel at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jim,
>>>>
>>>> After  I sent the draft to the owasp list, I received a request to be
>>>> part of the committee from the following members
>>>> Carlos Allende
>>>> Azzedine Menouchi
>>>> Amro
>>>> Christian Ducharme
>>>>
>>>> Christian is a relative new volunteer and had made some valuable
>>>> contributions reviewing some of the projects
>>>>
>>>> Other members have provided their feedback but I must say I wish the
>>>> participation into reviews was much higher, however most people struggle to
>>>> be committed to do this because of the amount of work involved into
>>>> testing  Owasp projects.it sounds simple, but consuming hardly well
>>>> documented owasp projects , Configuring and install them can be
>>>> challenging, especially those ones that are not click and install.
>>>>
>>>> Being that said, and based on my experience, what I expect from these
>>>> members is feedback when proposing guidelines.
>>>>
>>>> In the past, project review committees and technical board failed
>>>> because it was expected that volunteer members will be doing these kind of
>>>> work. Unfortunately, experience have shown that we cannot expect this
>>>> because most volunteers do not have the time and regular commitment to do
>>>> this, therefore my focus has been to automate some of these tasks and
>>>> create an analysis structure where we focus on some key indicators.
>>>> eventually we might create a budget to hire , when necessary, a
>>>> tester/programmer to support us with some of these tasks as we are about to
>>>> do, by configuring the builds into the VM machine and be able to smoke test
>>>> using automated tools such as Ranorex.
>>>>
>>>> I have been managing with Kait must of the work of with the
>>>> communication and status of the projects through JIRA, so we have a history
>>>> of the actions per projects.
>>>>
>>>> My personal situation will also change in the future , so all the work
>>>> I have done so far, will be done in cycles to allow a realistic planning.
>>>> We have been able to clean the inventory and set a process for reviews,
>>>> based on the actual resources.
>>>>
>>>> This is what I can offer as a volunteer and member of a this committee.
>>>> This is what we can achieve as a team based of previous experiences,
>>>> successes and fails.
>>>>
>>>> Let me know as a board if you want to move fwd with the proposal and
>>>> the committee based on the actual situation
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Johanna
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, September 16, 2014, Jim Manico <jim at manico.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Johanna,
>>>>>
>>>>> The OWASP Board reviewed your application for a project committee and
>>>>> agreed to move to the next step in the committee creation process outlined
>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/a/owasp.org/document/d/
>>>>> 1Qpb34WXJQfPdNOc2w7iwGwgwDUsI8GmGtM8C6bRPzU8/edit?pli=1
>>>>>
>>>>> Johanna, the next step is to find 5 OWASP members in good standing who
>>>>> wish to be a part of this committee. There is a 5 member minimum to create
>>>>> a committee.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since this is all part of the new Committee 2.0 process and this is my
>>>>> first time sending an email of this nature, can anyone please correct my
>>>>> process if wrong here?
>>>>>
>>>>> Aloha,
>>>>> Jim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20140917/9a92024b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list