[Pgi-wg] No PGI TelCon today

[David Wallom]

Morris,

I have to agree with Steven, whilst it is important that you and Balazs as
chairs drive progress within the groups as the people responsible to
fulfilling the groups deliverables, it is also important that the whole
group is aware of the decision to cancel and if it wants can still hold a
meeting without you present. It is also the case that people from I would
imagine other middleware production efforts are still interested, for
example OMII and GENESIS?

I am interested that not a single person from UNICORE, gLITE or ARC are able
to attend? If this is the case then OGF should raise this matter with their
leadership to find out why etc.

David


On 29/07/2009 12:29, "Steven Newhouse" <Steven.Newhouse at cern.ch> wrote:

> Hi Morris,
>  
>> That might be the case, but take into account that it's vacation time,
>> at least in Europe - and the rather more important group argument
>> should be that there are not enough significant 'voices' today to make
>> decisions or even meaningful progress.
> 
> Sure... but there was no call on the mailing list to see if anyone would be
> available for a call, or if there was anyone else available who could lead the
> call. The WG chairs do not have to lead every call, they are certainly
> expected to drive progress within the group.
> 
>> There is no point to have an agreement w/o gLite, UNICORE, ARC.
> 
> While I agree with this... (with my EGEE hat on) there are also other groups
> involved in this WG and it is VERY worrying (with my OGF hat on) that a WG
> chair should make a statement that only a particular technologies have an
> 'important' voice in an activity.
> 
> I'm sure this was a mistake...
> 
>> If this group is really following a collaborative process, we should
>> have a voice from everybody who is interested - and when we not wait
>> for one or more interested voices in terms of  'just-going-forward-
>> with-meaningless-decisions' - that would be not a WIN/WIN game in the
>> end that we want to achieve in the group.
> 
> Which it seems to be from this statement...
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Steven
> _______________________________________________
> Pgi-wg mailing list
> Pgi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg