[Infrastructure] Member management database structure

Mon Mar 14 21:26:56 UTC 2022

Wayne,

Thanks for the comments, this gives me a bit more insight into the organization. 

*	- Interested Parties can be individuals. How will that be handled? (e.g. create a dummy org for each individual?)

*	From what I gathered from the V2 registry, they’re currently entered as a Member_Org as well with their personal name. At current, the system already supports this method. Do we want to keep this?  Perhaps we could keep this method of operating, but add a “isIndividual” flag to the organization for more clarity.

*	If we're going to eventually use this system to drive mailing list subscriptions, then we need to be able to define subcommittees. We may be able to just use the existing group structure, but there are some differences (e.g. subcommittees don't vote, and you need to be a member of the WG to join a SC).

*	So, yes, my original idea was to use the Forum Group functions for this. It’s specifically why I didn’t call it Working Groups in the system. 
*	Regarding the differences:

*	“No voting for subcommittees”: I’ve translated it currently as the fact that voting is done only on ballots. Ballots in turn are connected to a forum group. Technically that could means someone could create a ballot for a subcommittee in the system, but I’m kind of trusting that the members using the system will abide by the rules already in place. Not that only administrators (which all Chairs and Vice-Chairs should be) can create ballots and register votes that have been done by email. 
*	“You need to be a member of the WG to join a SC”: We should be able to tackle that technically I suppose, setting that group B (a subcommittee) “belongs to” group A (a WG). 

*	- I'm assuming that there won't be a "Forum" group since the bylaws dictate that Forum membership is a function of WG membership. We'll just need to be able to aggregate WG membership to create attendance lists for Forum meetings.

*	My idea was that it would have, since it does have meetings and thus attendance registration and minutes. I may need more clarity on this item though. Perhaps we can discuss more, or on the next call.

*	- It'd be nice to add a column to member orgs to track IPR agreements. This could be a URL to the signed agreement. Individual Interested Parties also sign these agreements.

*	I’ll incorporate that, no problem!

Regards,

Martijn

From: Wayne Thayer <wthayer at gmail.com> 
Sent: Friday, 11 March 2022 18:10
To: Martijn Katerbarg <martijn.katerbarg at sectigo.com>
Cc: infrastructure at cabforum.org
Subject: Re: [Infrastructure] Member management database structure

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Martijn,

The schema looks quite comprehensive! Here are a few additional ideas to consider:

- Interested Parties can be individuals. How will that be handled? (e.g. create a dummy org for each individual?)

- If we're going to eventually use this system to drive mailing list subscriptions, then we need to be able to define subcommittees. We may be able to just use the existing group structure, but there are some differences (e.g. subcommittees don't vote, and you need to be a member of the WG to join a SC).

- I'm assuming that there won't be a "Forum" group since the bylaws dictate that Forum membership is a function of WG membership. We'll just need to be able to aggregate WG membership to create attendance lists for Forum meetings.

- It'd be nice to add a column to member orgs to track IPR agreements. This could be a URL to the signed agreement. Individual Interested Parties also sign these agreements

Thanks,

Wayne

On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 9:47 AM Martijn Katerbarg via Infrastructure <infrastructure at cabforum.org <mailto:infrastructure at cabforum.org> > wrote:

Hi all,

As just discussed on the call, attached is a diagram of the current database setup for the new member management system.

As Wayne pointed out, there have been requests to have specific members (type people)  that should have voting rights in 1 WG, but not in another. This part has not been included in this version, but I’ll get working on that.

Regards,

Martijn

_______________________________________________
Infrastructure mailing list
Infrastructure at cabforum.org <mailto:Infrastructure at cabforum.org> 
https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.cabforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Finfrastructure&data=04%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C601ee1807d264b901c8708da03820684%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637826154244720258%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=vddqmhpze2da%2Fo%2B34IAYiDQScKTmgM8ExBh1MOzwk0s%3D&reserved=0> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20220314/06bdbfcb/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20220314/06bdbfcb/attachment-0001.p7s>