Difference between revisions of "Community Council Log 20100429"
From Apache OpenOffice Wiki
(Added category, removed warning for wiki guidelines)
m (Small formatting correction)
|Line 1:||Line 1:|
=== IRC Log 2010-04-29 ===
=== IRC Log 2010-04-29 ===
|Line 339:||Line 337:|
[16:13:20] louis_to :-)
[16:13:20] louis_to :-)
[16:13:26] louis_to so all in favour of adjourning the meeting?
[16:13:26] louis_to so all in favour of adjourning the meeting?
Revision as of 21:30, 20 May 2010
IRC Log 2010-04-29
- Supposed start time: 18:30 UTC
- Time offset −0400 UTC
- Location: IRC
- Christoph Noack (christoph_n)
- Eike Rathke (erAck)
- Matthias Huetsch (mhu)
- Louis Suárez-Potts (louis_to)
- Stefan Taxhet (stx12)
- Cor Nouws (holiday)
- Charles-H. Schulz
- Olivier Hallot
- mystery candidate
[14:47:00] * mhu thinks we should start [14:47:12] louis_to we did [14:47:27] louis_to all in favour of prior minutes? [14:47:48] louis_to oh---procedureal point: who is driving today's meeting? I can do it but is christoph_n wanting to? [14:48:09] christoph_n Louis, go on :-) I just updated the agenda page. [14:48:26] christoph_n Although I have to admit that there is no real agenda of the last meeting ... [14:48:36] louis_to okay, thanks [14:48:47] louis_to so we approve; any objections, please indicate now or in the list [14:49:06] louis_to 1. : elections have taken place and results posted.k [14:49:17] louis_to thanks to Stefan and the oithers for doing the work! [14:49:33] louis_to especial thanks to Stefan, in fact, who served as commisaire [14:50:00] stx12 no, that was christoph_n [14:50:07] louis_to ah :-) [14:50:12] louis_to then my hat is off to you, tooi [14:50:16] christoph_n ;-) [14:50:28] christoph_n However, can we "close" this AI? There is a follow-up... [14:50:33] * mhu thinks, speaking of election results, we should welcome Eike, no ? [14:50:44] louis_to yes, to both! [14:50:49] louis_to and that was my next point [14:50:59] louis_to Welcome to Eike! [14:51:05] erAck thanks :) [14:51:17] jsc i think we should inform Olivier about our frequent meetings ... [14:51:18] stx12 you'll have fun with us ;-) [14:51:21] louis_to I'd like to then issue a public welcome, as we did with the others [14:51:27] christoph_n or make fun of us [14:51:43] louis_to and only regret that we, or at least I, cannot be part of the anticipated beer party :-) [14:53:59] jsc AI closed? Louis will send the official welcome mail [14:55:29] louis_to yes [14:55:36] louis_to today, in fact [14:55:51] stx12 plus the thanks to our former members; btw now i have the chance to introduce martin as my stand-in [14:56:20] louis_to yes. [14:56:22] louis_to :-) [14:56:36] jsc yes, and please include a link on our meeting schedule in the welcome mail [14:56:41] louis_to the only item for elections reconsideration is the Produt Dev. Rep. [14:56:48] louis_to thanks; good point [14:57:01] louis_to I'll send it first to discuss@council [14:57:45] louis_to by the way, I think using "accepted/ non accepted" is not quite so felicitous in English, and I'd prefer a slightly different terminology, but it's not important, really [14:57:57] louis_to I refer to: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Elections/2010-03 [14:57:58] christoph_n Proposals welcome... [14:58:22] christoph_n (I thought about it, really.) [14:58:25] louis_to stx12: have you added Olivier and Eike to the discuss@coiuncil list and Christoph, have you updated the relevant web page? [14:58:40] louis_to or jsc? [14:58:52] christoph_n I don't have write access (or, I never tried). [14:58:54] louis_to in short, we need to update the relevant pages with the new members' information [14:59:01] jsc i have updated the council webpage [14:59:08] louis_to really? I guess I failed to give you that; I shall do so now [14:59:26] louis_to jsc, thanks [14:59:39] christoph_n Ah, forced reload makes it visible. [14:59:51] stx12 louis_to: no, i'll add them to the list... [15:00:03] jsc well the new design is till missing [15:00:04] christoph_n @jsc: Could you please update the "five project leads" issue? This doesn't conform to the current CC structure. [15:00:31] jsc ok, i will correct it [15:00:42] christoph_n Sorry, of course ... don't update the issue. *g* [15:01:13] louis_to christoph_n: off channle, can you send me your username for OOo? [15:01:19] louis_to likewise, eike, I forgot yours [15:01:27] louis_to thanks, stx12 [15:01:34] christoph_n Yes, I can do that - anyway: christophnoack [15:01:35] erAck louis_to: er [15:01:57] louis_to okay, once these are doine, list esp., the key procedural issues for new members is tkane care of, lacking only the re-process of the dev. rep. [15:02:07] louis_to thanks, eike [15:02:15] stx12 eike and olivier are subscribed [15:02:21] louis_to thanks [15:04:08] christoph_n Next item? [15:04:11] louis_to so, on to #2 [15:04:23] louis_to I have not sent what I meant to two weeks ago, the update to the language [15:04:30] louis_to my only change that is substantial: [15:04:42] louis_to after 6 months, the project can be deemed to be effectively dead [15:04:53] louis_to if there is no meaningful activity oin the lists [15:05:04] louis_to this obtains for both NLC and Incubator projects [15:05:40] louis_to I'd also liek to add the clarification that merely by having an INcubator project--we want many---does not mean that it will necessarily go on to Accepted status [15:05:41] jsc sounds reasonable for me [15:05:56] louis_to it means nothing at all, in fact and to move on requires a specific request by the lead [15:06:47] christoph_n Short question: Is there a complete text available? I didn't see anything on counci-discuss ... nor in my inbox (but maybe I have missed it). [15:06:51] louis_to my addition of that latter comes from a discussion I had recently, where "incubator" was seen as inevitably leading to accepted [15:07:10] louis_to christoph_n: no [15:07:15] louis_to but I will send it in [15:07:28] christoph_n Okay. [15:07:42] louis_to the language for both is fairly similar but the incubator has the divergences: does one want to make it an accepted or keep it as is? [15:08:14] jsc i would like to talk more about specific tasks. And not about projects. Sometimes we need things to be done and they are finished the task is finished and that's it. No further activity necessary ... [15:08:16] louis_to and if it is to be clsoed, is this then a fore-step in the process to accepted, in which case, "closure" is simply a renaming, oir is it really a sign of neglect [15:08:29] louis_to jsc: context? [15:08:42] jsc .. when they are finished ... [15:08:49] louis_to an incubator / project can be of that sort [15:09:00] louis_to stx12 and I had this dicussion about 7, 8 years ago [15:09:14] jsc i think it's wrong to create new projects for everything ... [15:09:16] louis_to and the issue then is the issue now: to devise, using CollabNet's tools, ad hoc projects [15:09:37] louis_to and that was the issue that he raised, as a project is a memory that will linger, no matter how we expunge it [15:09:50] louis_to the solution as such is to use the wiki and subproject [15:09:59] louis_to but then that has NOTHING to do with an incubator project as such [15:10:27] louis_to but need only be mentioned in the guidelines, and the logistics there woiuld be to work with the iteam that comes into being for this purpose [15:10:33] louis_to so that one can find it [15:10:41] louis_to I can put some language to that point, thanks [15:10:53] louis_to eg, if oine wants an ad hoc project, then doi X, Y, Z. [15:11:10] louis_to or to resolve a specific problem or task [15:11:30] louis_to but we also resolved this long ago by focusing more on IssueZilla, as we had it then [15:11:37] jsc the term project as we use it tody raise too much expectations from my point of view [15:11:47] jsc but hey it's my personal opinion [15:11:49] louis_to yes, we agree, jsc, and we are way ahead of you [15:12:07] louis_to and I simply a) agreed, and b) laid out solution, and c) provided historical context [15:12:54] jsc ok, go ahead ... [15:13:01] louis_to right, so #3 [15:13:17] louis_to Martin's AI.... [15:13:48] louis_to given the absence of MH, I'd suggest to just send in a proposal to the list along the lines of, [15:14:23] jsc i will talk to Martin and if necessary will take over this AI [15:14:31] louis_to thanks [15:14:39] mhu maybe, we could ask Martin to send his proposal ? [15:14:56] mhu okay, thanks jsc [15:14:58] louis_to it's not so hard.... just to focus on getting qs. from the peopel and also setting up a time period [15:15:08] louis_to kidn of like what we do during OOoCon [15:15:33] mhu right [15:18:48] christoph_n (tick tack tick ta...) [15:19:01] louis_to move on to #4 [15:19:10] jsc see the update in the agenda [15:19:12] jsc no real update because the lack of time. But we are working on it and i hope to publish a first draft soon (probably next week) [15:19:13] jsc I am looking forward how this concept will be accepted and how it will work ... [15:19:58] louis_to thanks. can you suggest when there might be an update? [15:20:06] louis_to my interest relates to: [15:20:11] jsc sorry that i can't give more new info but i had an unplanned stop for 5 days in Brazil [15:20:16] louis_to a) it's nearly summer for many students in the North Hemisphere [15:20:20] louis_to ah [15:20:28] louis_to yes, am familiar with that problem.... [15:20:35] louis_to and with ashy forecsats. [15:21:15] louis_to b) I'd like to see if we can aim this for the coming school year, as the summer period may be over by now for new issues like this [15:21:30] jsc well the bounties are open for all not only students and if they get well accepted it can be an ongoing effort as long as we have money for new ... [15:22:06] louis_to right; but it's the marketing that will attract new (students or not) that needs to be pitched.... [15:22:08] louis_to that's all [15:22:35] louis_to for instance, it'd be very cool to announce something like this at OOoCon or even at Oracle Open World [15:23:12] jsc sure, i will do my best and i am sure that we will have something to announce soon [15:23:13] louis_to oir at Oscon (July) or even at something similar elsewhere in the world... too late for LinuxTag, alas [15:23:19] louis_to thanks!! [15:23:32] louis_to #5.... [15:23:46] louis_to no update.... [15:23:51] louis_to #6... [15:23:54] * mhu thinks, louis_to is talking about internship, not docu bounties ? [15:24:04] stx12 actually there is... for #5 [15:24:10] louis_to go ahead..... [15:24:46] stx12 we stumbled over the budget and cor asked us (mhu, mh and me) to think about a resolution. [15:25:18] stx12 it was proposed to use some of the money left from last year for the internship. [15:26:02] stx12 we think there is a one time opportunity to do that and raise the development budget. [15:26:46] stx12 we should avoid the impression that we can do that on a regular basis. but we would like to run the internship every year. [15:27:04] louis_to thanks. [15:27:18] louis_to I'd be hopeful we can obtain a regular source from a corporate angel [15:27:19] stx12 second there was an amount of 8 slots x 4000 EUR proposed. [15:27:42] stx12 at least i understood that we talked about EUR. [15:27:59] mhu ...increase the budget, so that docu bounties and internship can be covered this year. ... stx12 is explaining it all ... so I stay silent ... [15:28:12] stx12 lokking at similar programs this amount seems to high. [15:28:17] stx12 too high. [15:28:32] louis_to stx12: that was my impression, too, but Cor pointed out the math.... [15:28:41] louis_to ie, 8 X 4K [15:29:11] stx12 i'm fine with 4k USD or 3.5K EUR (which is even more) [15:29:23] jsc me too [15:29:58] mhu finally, we have not (yet) so much money as Google [15:30:08] stx12 so we will clarify the budget with martin (who is the owner) so that we can run the internship and the bounties and have a bit air to breath [15:30:31] jsc sounds like a plan [15:30:44] stx12 an dmartin just send a message that other expenses shouldn't be a blocker. [15:31:14] stx12 to me this sounds like we are ready to continue with the internship as planned by cor and friends... [15:31:48] louis_to yes. [15:32:19] mhu yes [15:32:28] jsc yes, should inform Cor about the update ... [15:32:44] jsc .. i inform ... [15:32:49] louis_to shall we then update the item ? It seems quite solid and also allows us then to move publicly with this, once we have the other elements [15:33:25] louis_to that is to say, "What remains for the internship to move forward?" [15:34:00] jsc update of the related wiki page, i can at least update the money related items [15:34:08] louis_to thanks [15:34:20] louis_to and then? I mean, when can we start soliciting for interns, etc.? [15:34:26] louis_to there are many who could be interested [15:34:36] stx12 initiate the budget request with martin... [15:34:48] louis_to and I' dlike to ensure that we work with marketing on this [15:35:02] louis_to which i can do, but .... [15:35:45] stx12 cor, jsc and mathias b. will takes this i guess. [15:36:21] louis_to then let's ask them to work with Marketing... [15:36:25] jsc i have already promoted it or at least the plans in Brazil ;-) [15:36:35] jsc i will take care of it [15:37:33] erAck before we market internships, wouldn't we need tasks from the projects first that could be worked on in an internship? [15:38:17] louis_to yes. [15:38:37] jsc well, we have the to-do lists and of course people can suggest their own project. [15:38:43] stx12 that's what i raised last time. the approach was planned a bit different to avoid the blocker. but yes, that helps. [15:38:45] louis_to much needs to be refined, first, but we can still Market the idea in general and start engaging the MKT group to expand its boundaries [15:38:58] erAck ok [15:39:12] christoph_n The "project proposals" aren't up to date, I think. The wiki page by Cor lists some suggestions how to continue. [15:39:44] stx12 i think i will call for "task proposals" anyway - if noone objects... [15:39:58] christoph_n stx12: Very good! [15:40:10] jsc up to date is relative. Ideas that ae not yet implemented are still open... [15:40:54] stx12 yes, but not every idea / effort / task / project is in scope for the internship... [15:41:12] stx12 let's put out a list in parallel to all the todos. [15:41:18] louis_to I think any new proposal must be negotiated [15:41:55] louis_to shall we move on to #6? [15:42:10] stx12 yes [15:42:25] mhu yes [15:42:52] jsc yes [15:43:02] louis_to nothing substantial I can add to agenda items; it has to do with the actual remit of Education project. This will be more feasibly addressed now that the internship program is moving forward, I believe [15:43:48] louis_to shall we move on to #7? [15:44:09] christoph_n Mmh, should we then close it? Or just wait... [15:44:14] stx12 yes, where is sotherncross btw... [15:44:17] louis_to afaik, no updates, but I do have a really long and interesting email from Sinhala [15:44:34] christoph_n (Sorry, I meant #6) [15:44:49] louis_to project lead, and I'll see if I can put that into the newsletter. it pertains to questions related to OOo in Sinhala and other issues [15:45:17] louis_to but let's move onto post-#7 [15:46:14] louis_to and I confess I doin't see how we can discuss these items here as proposals requriing yes/no votes [15:46:24] louis_to if anyone wants to add insight here.... [15:46:51] christoph_n Sorry, do we really talk about 2010-04-01#7? [15:47:32] louis_to my point is : no [15:47:41] louis_to until they are framed in a way that allows for talk [15:47:49] louis_to so, I'd like to call to adjourn today's meeting [15:48:06] louis_to IRC log will be posted shortly; AIs: I ask someone else to update the page? [15:48:20] christoph_n Sorry, there are some items that are important. [15:48:25] louis_to and before ending today's, I'd like to ask Eike if he has anytinmng he wants to add... [15:48:29] mhu can we at least quickly talk about next meetings schedule (last item) [15:48:31] louis_to oh, okay, go ahead [15:48:45] louis_to agreed: christoph_n: go ahead [15:48:58] christoph_n Okay. [15:49:04] erAck louis_to: I've nothing to add today. [15:49:11] christoph_n Jumping to 2010-04-29#1: CC Election [15:49:26] christoph_n Everybody knows the current situation - the proposal is to re-do the election cycle. [15:49:38] christoph_n First question: Do we agree here? [15:49:53] christoph_n (for the Product Dev Representative) [15:50:02] stx12 yes [15:50:03] erAck yes [15:50:06] louis_to +1 [15:50:27] mhu +1 [15:50:30] jsc +1 [15:50:32] christoph_n +1 [15:50:40] christoph_n Okay, are there any other seats to be elected (soon)? Can we combine an election? [15:51:19] louis_to christoph_n: that would be for me, new product dev, and who else? mhu, I believe [15:51:29] mhu probably [15:51:44] christoph_n probably ... with a tendency towards ... :-) [15:52:00] mhu ...1 [15:52:28] christoph_n Okay, are there any reasons to wait a few days/weeks, or should we start as soon as possible? [15:52:41] christoph_n (I think we can start in a few days.) [15:52:46] stx12 please remeeber that we can only run 1 election for a constituency at a time. [15:52:56] stx12 i don't see a need to wait. [15:53:04] mhu we used to have some overlap between old and new members terms ... [15:53:20] louis_to i would wait until June, so as the new members can learn what is what [15:53:30] louis_to and this is echoing mhu [15:53:31] stx12 a few days is ok; but then let's restart the election for the product dev seat. [15:53:37] mhu thats what i wanted to say [15:53:40] christoph_n Ah, so the "5 project leads representatives" are like "product dev seats". [15:54:15] stx12 no, they are a mixture of prod dev and code contribs [15:54:45] christoph_n Okay, to be clear: We start the election cycle as soon as possible to find a representative for the product dev. [15:54:58] christoph_n mhu and louis_to have to wait ;-) [15:54:58] stx12 christoph_n: yes [15:55:06] mhu yes [15:55:08] louis_to yes, that is desired [15:55:23] christoph_n Good, then I'll prepare the wiki page to election 2010-05. [15:55:35] christoph_n Upcoming ... [15:55:48] stx12 thanks [15:55:49] christoph_n 2010-04-29#2: Missing OOo desktop presence [15:56:11] christoph_n I know that it is late, but we already missed the request for the last meeting. Let's - at least - see how to deal with it. [15:56:32] louis_to christoph_n: my point was and is that it needs to be framed in a way that is actionable [15:56:34] louis_to it is not now [15:56:46] louis_to if you wish to frame it that way, go ahead [15:57:37] christoph_n My question was about how to continue. Is a discussion (soon) on the list appropriate for all? [15:57:53] mhu yes [15:58:12] christoph_n At least, we accept this AI since it is a community member request - yes? [15:58:20] louis_to not necessarily [15:58:30] louis_to why don't you send it to the list and let us deal with it there? [15:58:44] louis_to a proper question and proposal must be actionable and must be within our remit [15:58:46] christoph_n Cor already asked us and nobody (really) replied. [15:58:55] louis_to we cannot accept those things that are out of our buonds [15:59:06] stx12 we hear the request and will propose a follow-up activity. [15:59:09] louis_to and Cor's acceptance is not the same as our being able to actualluy act on it [15:59:48] christoph_n stx12: Hear means, to forward it to council-discuss? [16:00:05] louis_to christoph_n: yes, please [16:00:27] christoph_n Louis, what would make this item "more actionable"? [16:00:41] louis_to can we vote ? is it within our remit? [16:00:46] stx12 no, it means, we heard / read it. i was going to say that i'm not sure that we will decide / discuss the question, but propose how to proceed. [16:00:46] louis_to let's see it on the list, please [16:01:11] louis_to I disagree with stx12 then, as I believe this should be framed in a way that can worked with if at all on the list [16:01:56] stx12 fine with me; i didn't think of raising proposals now. [16:02:30] jsc fine for me as well, let's move on the list [16:02:33] christoph_n I'm lost a bit :-) Louis, then please answer on the (upcoming) request on council-discuss how it can be made "more actionable" and "better framed". [16:02:45] christoph_n Good. Last item... [16:02:52] louis_to sure [16:02:53] christoph_n 2010-04-29#3: CC meetings calendar [16:03:38] christoph_n I'm more or less fine with the two weeks schedule, but the last 3 times either IRC Log or Meeting Minutes were missing. So if we need more time (or pressure) we should go back to the old schedule. [16:03:48] christoph_n (last time: both missing) [16:04:17] stx12 christoph_n: the last log was not linked but at the usual location [16:04:22] * mhu is fine with the dates as proposed in the calendar (i.e. 3 weeks schedule) [16:04:35] louis_to me too [16:04:42] christoph_n (Then I'll link it.) [16:04:56] stx12 done already [16:05:03] christoph_n stx12 -- cool! [16:05:15] christoph_n Eike, Jürgen, Stefan? [16:05:35] jsc i am not available in 2 weeks -> vacation. And i will check the other dates ... most of them looks fine [16:05:42] stx12 fine with me; now that i have a stand-in ;-) [16:05:46] christoph_n ;-) [16:05:57] christoph_n (So Martin is with us all the time...) [16:06:21] erAck every 3 weeks is fine, I think. [16:06:24] christoph_n Eike, you may not agree to each of the items - just state if you are generally fine. [16:06:26] christoph_n (Oh, thanks) [16:06:27] stx12 he is on irc but to shy to join ;-) [16:07:00] christoph_n Okay, anything else? [16:07:05] * erAck is switching back and forth between browser and irc ... [16:07:19] jsc i saw, the next meeting is in 3 weeks. It's fine for ;-) [16:07:41] christoph_n Good. One last question: How to deal with the minutes? [16:07:55] louis_to by minutes youi mean AIs [16:07:56] louis_to yes? [16:07:57] christoph_n I can incorporate the changes for the last items I "moderated" [16:07:59] louis_to I can do the IRC [16:08:14] louis_to and I ahd asked for updates to the webpage continaing the agneda with AIs [16:08:21] louis_to there was no response; you are asking that again [16:09:00] christoph_n Since we agreed to manage both agenda and work status in one table ... [16:09:05] louis_to my impression was that we were all responsible for updating our own AIs [16:09:28] louis_to thereore, it is the responsibiliy of the AI assignee to update the webpage, yes? [16:09:31] christoph_n Will we do that? The last times it didn't work (well). [16:09:43] louis_to let's try it again.k [16:09:52] louis_to rahter than waste time here :-) [16:09:54] christoph_n We agreed on one person to "finalize" (minor touches) the agenda and copy it to the meeting minutes page. [16:11:06] christoph_n Waste = neither having a clear agenda nor minutes for the community [16:11:42] louis_to then I'll finalize it but requre that all with AIs update their relevant sections [16:11:54] christoph_n Will do that today, I think. [16:11:54] louis_to and I'll post this IRC to the usual location after meeting ends [16:13:04] christoph_n If this is okay for everyone, we may close this meeting. Louis, okay? [16:13:17] louis_to yes, and only indicate if it is NOT okay [16:13:20] louis_to :-) [16:13:26] louis_to so all in favour of adjourning the meeting?