Index Links: 2003 - All years - Original
                    The Apache Software Foundation

                  Board of Directors Meeting Minutes

                            June 25, 2003


1. Call to order

    The meeting was scheduled for 10am PDT -0700. A sufficient
    attendance to constitute a quorum was recognized by the chairman
    at 10:12am, at which point the meeting was called to order.  The
    meeting was held by teleconference hosted by Mark Cox, Red Hat.

    IRC #apacheboard on irc.freenode.net was used for backup purposes.

    Ben Laurie stood in for the Secretary to record these minutes.

2. Roll Call

    Directors Present:

        Ken Coar
        Mark Cox
        Roy T. Fielding
        Dirk-Willem van Gulik
        Ben Laurie
        Greg Stein

    Directors Absent:

        Sam Ruby
        Brian Behlendorf
        Jim Jagielski

    Guests:

        Chuck Murcko (Treasurer)

3. Minutes and supplements from previous meetings
 
    A. The meeting of February 19, 2003

       Minutes were not available for approval.
 
    B. The meeting of February 26, 2003

       Minutes were not available for approval.
 
    C. The meeting of April 16, 2003

       By general consent, minutes 'board_minutes_2003_04_16.txt'
       were approved.
 
4. Officer Reports
 
    A. Chairman [Greg]

       Greg reported that we now have 110 members, and that he was
       pleased with the way the IRC members meeting went. He observed
       that as membership increases, IRC meetings are the way
       forward. Ken noted that the Avalon PMC appeared to be running
       more smoothly.
    
    B. President [Dirk]

       Dirk had nothing new to report, but noted that the ASF is
       nearly in a position where it owns all its own infrastructure.
    
    C. Treasurer [Chuck]

       Chuck reported that the fund balances are as follows:

       PayPal:       $2,717.94
       WF checking:    $215.81
       WF premium: $102,694.95        
    
    D. Exec. V.P. and Secretary [Jim]

       Jim has received, as requested, the "tally sheets" for the board
       and new member elections to be filed. He has also started to
       receive the signed member applications. An email will go out
       later this week to all new members reminding them to (1) edit
       members.txt as required and (2) to send in their signed member
       apps.

       Other than a few signed CLAs, the ASF office has received no
       other official items requiring board or officer action
       (eg: invoices, etc.)

       As of June 21, Jim has not rec'd copies of any correspondence,
       other than the original letter, regarding the TM issue. These
       really should be filed.

5. Committee Reports

    A. Apache APR Project [Cliff Woolley]
    
       See Attachment A

    B. Apache Avalon Project [Berin Loritsch]
    
       See Attachment B

    C. Apache Commons Project [Ken Coar]
    
       See Attachment C

Sam Ruby joined at this point.

    D. Apache Jakarta Project [Sam Ruby]
    
       See Attachment D

    E. Apache PHP Project [Rasmus Lerdorf]
    
       See Attachment E

       It was decided that the way forward with PHP becoming more
       formally an ASF project was for a licence grant to be made to
       the ASF by the PHP Group. Greg took the action to discuss this
       option with the PHP Group.

    F. Apache Web Services Project [Davanum Srinivas]
    
       See Attachment F

       There was a discussion about seeking applying for export
       licenses for binaries made from ASF code. No conclusion was
       reached and further discussion was tabled for the next meeting.

6. Special Orders

    A. Appointment of ASF Officers for the next term.

       i. Chairman

         Nominees: Greg Stein

       ii. President

         Nominees: Dirk-Willem van Gulik
       
       iii. Treasurer

         Nominees: Chuck Murcko
       
       iv. Executive Vice President

         Nominees: Jim Jagielski
       
       v. Secretary

         Nominees: Jim Jagielski

       The nominations were accepted unanimously.
    
    B. Change the Apache XML Project Chair

       WHEREAS, the membership of the Apache XML Project Management
       Committee (PMC) have nominated Berin Lautenbach to serve as
       chairman of the Apache XML PMC; and

       WHEREAS, the previously appointed chairman of the Apache XML
       PMC, Theodore Leung, has resigned his position as Vice
       President, Apache XML, in favor of Berin Lautenbach's
       appointment to that position.

       NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Berin Lautenbach be and
       hereby is appointed to the office of Vice President, Apache
       XML, to serve in accordance with and subject to the direction
       of the Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the Foundation
       until death, resignation, retirement, removal or
       disqualification, or until a successor is appointed.

       This motion was accepted unanimously.

       At this point Sam Ruby left the meeting.
    
    C. Change the Apache HTTP Project Chair

       WHEREAS, the membership of the Apache HTTP Server Project
       Management Committee (PMC) have nominated Sander Striker to
       serve as chairman of the Apache HTTP PMC; and

       WHEREAS, the previously appointed chairman of the Apache HTTP
       Server PMC, Ben Hyde, has resigned his position as Vice
       President, Apache HTTP, in favor of Sander Striker's
       appointment to that position.

       NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Sander Striker be and
       hereby is appointed to the office of Vice President, Apache
       HTTP Server, to serve in accordance with and subject to the
       direction of the Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the
       Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal or
       disqualification, or until a successor is appointed.

       This motion was accepted unanimously.

    D. Discussion: voting and election of the Board

       The board decided that the voting was valid, and hence the
       election of the board as shown in the Members Meeting Minutes
       should stand.

       It was independently discussed whether there should be a revote
       anyway, in light of various members misunderstanding of the
       system and other misgivings, but it was decided that there was
       not sufficient cause to justify the time and effort required to
       stage a revote.
    
    E. Discussion: low voter turnout

       It was noted that only around half the members actually voted,
       which could cause problems reaching quorum as the size of the
       ASF increases. It was observed that it would take a change of
       the bylaws to enable non-attending members to be forcibly
       declared emeritus, but that this could be done when it became
       necessary to do so, and is not needed pre-emptively. It was
       decided in any case to contact members who have not
       participated in ASF business recently to see if they would
       prefer to voluntarily go emeritus. No-one in particular took
       this action, however.

    F. Discussion: publishing [to ASF Members] of the vote counts

       The board decided that in the interest of openness and in order
       to better explain the workings of STV, the vote and the tally
       record for the board election should be published. (The
       secretary notes that on reflection it was not clear whether
       this applied to previous board elections or just the most
       recent one). Jim will be asked to action this.

       It was decided that the results of new member elections should
       not be published, as the potential new members are not notified
       in advance and so could be caused needless embarassment in the
       event of non-election or a subsequent refusal of membership.

    G. Discussion: what does it mean to be an ASF Member?  [Jim]

       The discussion was again initiated on the members@apache.org
       mailing list, and has again show the depth and width of
       what it means to various people. The discussion will be
       allowed to continue, free-style, for another week or
       so, and which point Jim will draft up a list of some sort
       detailing what appears to be the main value points. This
       will be presented to members@ at which point, we will start
       including community@ into the discussion as well. Outside
       perceptions can be quite illuminating.

7. Unfinished Business

    None.

8. New Business

    None.

9. Announcements

    None.

10. Adjournment

    The meeting was adjourned at 11:22 PDT -0700.


============
ATTACHMENTS:
============

-----------------------------------------
Attachment A: Status report for the Apache APR Project

It has been a relatively slow quarter for the Apache Portable
Runtime Project, with most of our effort focusing on maintenance,
bug fixes, and performance tweaks.  This is to be expected,
of course, since we have spent the last year stabilizing our
codebase and API for a 1.0 release of our library.

We have been pleased to see a further increase in the quantity
and quality of contributions from various third parties.  This
would seem to indicate further interest and acceptance of our
project within the development community.

The stemming of the tide of major changes is indicative of the 
fact that our stabilization period has been successful and that
now is the time to press forward and get version 1.0 out the
door; that will likely be the focus of our project in the
upcoming quarter.


-----------------------------------------
Attachment B: Status report for the Apache Avalon Project

The Apache Avalon Project saw some mixed results this quarter,
but the net result is positive.  We were forced to remove
committership for Peter Donald due to his ongoing issues with
the other Avalon committers.  In the past he has contributed
a lot to the project, but in the past year his activities
proved to tear the community apart.

There is a much more relaxed atmosphere with the community
now, and we are actually starting to be able to make some
strides in cooperating with other Apache projects.  We have
started a plan to work with Apache Log4J to migrate the
Avalon LogKit users to Log4J and provide better support for
Log4J in the Avalon suite of tools.

Apache Avalon has a fresh release of all of its components,
and is getting ready to release another set.  The long awaited
Fortress container has also been released.  As the team went
through the release process it identified certain components
that were out of scope of what the Avalon project is for, and
has provided a migration path for our existing users.

The Avalon team is beginning to resume talks on how to move
forward with the technical future of Avalon.  It seems that
we have a decent idea of how we want to work together as a
community, and we can move forward without forgetting our user
base.  The Avalon team has been trying to move in this direction
for the past few months, and have recently been able to start
constructively within the past couple of weeks.

-----------------------------------------
Attachment C: Status report for the Apache Commons Project

There has been no progress in the Commons Project.


-----------------------------------------
Attachment D: Status report for the Apache Jakarta Project

No report was received, and the Jakarta Chair was unprepared to
provide a verbal report.


-----------------------------------------
Attachment E: Status report for the Apache PHP Project

PHP usage keeps growing both in absolute numbers and in terms of
the percentage of servers with it installed.  

Graph: http://www.php.net/usage.php

Roughly 31% of all domains have PHP installed and detectable by 
Netcraft.  SecuritySpace reports 51% of all Apache servers have
PHP enabled.

The current version is 4.3.2 with 4.3.3 scheduled soon.  PHP 5.0
is also approaching beta with the major change being more advanced
OO capabilities.  

Due to MySQL AB changing the license of the mysqlclient library
from LGPL to GPL for 4.x versions we will no longer bundle the 
library and have to be careful to write our MySQL extension such 
that it can be linked against the older non-GPL version of the
client libraries.  There will most likely be an exception for
OSI-approved licensed projects that will alleviate this problem a 
bit, but we will still unbundle the library.  This does put some
pressure on us to use an OSI-approved license and as you know the
new ASL is not OSI-approved (yet).

There has also been discussion around whether we should make an
effort to try to drink more of the ASF Koolaid or not.  We still
don't have a clear picture of what the impact on the project would
be.  We don't know if we have to go back and get CLA's from the 450
people who have contributed something to the project over the past
10 years and what the changes to our day to day way of doing things
would be.  Statements from Greg and others that include "for now"
or "initially" really haven't helped this in any way.  

We understand that copyright needs to be assigned to the ASF and 
that the ASF then would put it under the new ASL license.  

We understand that we would need to separate our CVS into two
repositories most likely.  One that contains only ASF licensed
code and one that has everything else.  How much stuff we can 
leave in the "everything else" repository is still unclear.  We
bundle a number of things that PHP simply wouldn't work without
including Zend and PCRE and less critically GD, sqlite, libxml
and a few others.  And we understand that there would be some
oversight in some form of the ASF repository.

We are looking for a statement from the board which does not 
contain the phrases "for now" nor "initially" and clearly lays
out the board position for what will be required for the ASF
to have proper oversight over the PHP project.  Especially
if there are things beyond the above issues such as specifying
how many feathers our web site should have, how we should run our
PMC, how we handle granting new CVS accounts and what sort of
oversight would be required on the 6 dedicated servers that run
the php.net infrastructure.


-----------------------------------------
Attachment F: Status report for the Web Services Project

* what code releases have been made? [since the last report]

   1. Apache Axis 1.1 Final 

* any new projects in process of being accepted?

   1. Trying to setup a WS-Commons similar to xml-commons and
      jakarta-commons. Details at

      http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?WebServicesProjectPages/CharterForWSCommons

* any legal issues to bring to the board?

   No Progress on RSA with regard to OpenSAML

* any cross-project issues that need to be addressed?

   none

* any problems with committers, members, etc?

   none

* plans and expectations for the next period?

   1. Initial planning for 3 new components (projects?/sub-projects?)
      a. WS-Security (http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?SecurityProposal)
      b. WS-SchemaAPI? (http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?SchemaAPIProposal)
      c. WS-Jaxb (http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?JaxbProposal) 
   2. Will start VOTE on WS-PMC Charter this week
   3. Will start VOTE on WS-Commons Charter this week 


__________________________________________________________
End of minutes for the 25 June 2003 board meeting.


Attending:

        Ken Coar
        Mark Cox
        Roy T. Fielding
        Dirk-Willem van Gulik
        Ben Laurie
        Greg Stein

Sam Ruby joined partway through

Guests:
	Chuck Murcko


Minutes were accepted

4A. 110 members, pleased with IRC members meeting. PMCs generally
moving well. Noted by Ken Avalon was running more smoothly.

4B. Nothing new. Noted that infrastructure was now nearly all our own.

4C. (figures from chuck via email) - Discussion re. PayPal, we can now
move as much money as once, reservations about suitability for large
amounts.

Reports: see attachments.

Commons: no progress.

Sam present from here.

PHP: we need a licence grant from PHP group to proceed. Greg will
discuss with PHP Group.

Axis: discussion re: crypto licensing. No conclusion.

New officers: unanimous

6B. Accepted unanimously

Sam lost

6C. Accepted unanimously

6D. Was the election process valid? We believe it was as good as we
can do. Noted that we should be clearer about formal announcements of
meetings. Corrections must be made by resending entire notices.

6E. Bylaws need changing to deal with inactive members?

6F. Board vote should be published - Jim to action. Members meeting
vote should not. Members meeting minutes published? Ask members. Greg
took action.

Index