[esip-semantictech] follow-up to today's discussion of subcommittees

[Mcgibbney, Lewis J (398M)]

Thank you, Erin, very helpful.
It looks like there is certainly scope and interest to form a SWEET cluster which reports to SemTech however I wonder if this is perhaps over administering the issue given the number of active committers to SWEET and the fact that we are all essentially SemTech members as well!
Any thoughts folks? I am happy to build consensus here…
Lewis


    Message: 2
    Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 15:12:57 -0400
    From: Erin Robinson <erinrobinson at esipfed.org>
    To: "Mcgibbney, Lewis J (398M)" <Lewis.J.Mcgibbney at jpl.nasa.gov>
    Cc: "esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org"
    	<esip-semanticweb at lists.esipfed.org>
    Subject: Re: [esip-semantictech] follow-up to today's discussion of
    	subcommittees
    Message-ID:
    	<CA+Cs4Y-_9X1A613eOHM82o-sghPj_Z9aQ9+U-i8DSmiLyE9ftA at mail.gmail.com>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
    
    Hi All - ESIP?s nomenclature for ?subcommittees? is cluster. Clusters can
    be formed for any reason by sending an email to the VP, Christine White.
    Clusters can apply for special project funding, if needed and get?s mailing
    list, telecon, slack channel etc. Cluster members have control of the
    governance of clusters. SWEET for now would be a good cluster. Clusters can
    report back to a committee briefly, if that is helpful.
    
    Committees are formed by a proposal to the entire ESIP assembly. I would
    not recommend this for either proposed topic at this stage. Working groups
    are being reformulated, so they are not an option right now.
    
    Please wait on ESIP board next steps on repository prior to forming a
    cluster. They meet in two weeks, so there should be an update for this
    group at end of October.
    
    Thanks-
    E