Community Council Log 20101014
IRC Log 2010-10-14
- Supposed start time: 18:30 UTC
- Location: IRC
Community Council Attendees
- Andreas Bartel (Andreas_UX)
- Christoph Noack (christoph_n)
- Cor Nouws (CorNouws)
- Eike Rathke (erAck)
- Juergen Schmidt (jsc)
- Louis Suárez-Potts (louis_to)
- Matthias Huetsch (mhu)
- Martin Hollmichel (_Nesshof_, deputy of Stefan Taxhet)
- Olivier Hallot (ohallot)
- Charles-H. Schulz
Meet the Community Council Session
(20:41:13) _Nesshof_: MechtiIde: any question or comments from you right now ?
(20:41:18) erAck: We have MechtiIde and paveljanik here, do you have questions?
(20:41:28) ***mhu thinks, the "public" is supposed to ask questions, that we are supposed to answer
(20:42:36) paveljanik: -back
(20:42:41) paveljanik: Hi erAck
(20:42:50) ***erAck notes we missed to announce the public session in advance.
(20:43:01) paveljanik: MechtiIde: you can start asking :-)
(20:44:01) MechtiIde: I'm more interested which other public person are interested on the Community Council of OpenOffice.org
(20:44:26) paveljanik: MechtiIde: me :-)
(20:45:00) MechtiIde: I'm thinking how doing the next Germanophone RElease of OpenOffice.org
(20:45:07) MechtiIde: as I did it in the past
(20:45:31) MechtiIde: paveljanik, you are not a desputy?
(20:45:44) paveljanik: I'm only interested in how OOoCouncil will solve the conflicts of interest of some members of it. Nothing else.
(20:45:46) paveljanik: MechtiIde: no.
(20:46:00) ***paveljanik is not despota nor deputy ;-)
(20:46:04) louis_to: MechtiIde: there are quite a few interested in the CC
(20:46:14) louis_to: and in joining it, many from the NLC
(20:46:23) erAck: MechtiIde: is the DE release at risk?
(20:47:16) MechtiIde: erAck, at this time *I* don't know how many people will do the release tests on the diffenrent plattforms
(20:47:58) mhu: paveljanik: not sure you will see a resolution now, as we have this discussion prior to our regular meeting
(20:48:03) MechtiIde: And I have not the time to do it all myself in the quality we did beore
(20:48:14) MechtiIde: before
(20:48:18) paveljanik: mhu: ah. Hmm.
(20:48:48) MechtiIde: mhu, will there be a Chatlog after the meeting?
(20:49:28) mhu: I am sure someone will publish the usual minutes of the meeting, so, yes I think so
(20:49:36) paveljanik: I (maybe I'm naive) expect that people with "conflict of interest" will automatically step down.
(20:50:03) paveljanik: this is what 1/2 of "public" wants :-)
(20:50:34) erAck: MechtiIde: I suggest to do the release / QA work as usual and see how it goes on.
(20:51:10) paveljanik: MechtiIde: how many people did you "lost"?
(20:51:23) MechtiIde: paveljanik, I don't know
(20:51:34) mhu: paveljanik: if nobody else does, I will take your comment to the meeting right after this
(20:51:45) paveljanik: MechtiIde: then I think you just have to go as usually
(20:52:04) ***_Nesshof_ agrees
(20:52:14) paveljanik: mhu: thanks
(20:52:17) CorNouws: paveljanik: what do you define as "conflict of interest" ?
(20:52:24) MechtiIde: paveljanik, I myself have only a smal timeframe because I have a new job
(20:52:38) MechtiIde: small
(20:52:46) paveljanik: CorNouws: read your national law and use your brain to accomodate.
(20:53:08) paveljanik: MechtiIde: I understand
(20:53:36) CorNouws: If I use my brain, that will lead to what I see and c-o-i
(20:55:02) paveljanik: OK, I have no other questions now.
(20:55:43) mhu: paveljanik: but are you satified with the (non-)answer?
(20:55:58) paveljanik: mhu: (!)yes.
(20:56:00) paveljanik: ;-)
(20:56:52) ***mhu needs some help to understand paveljanik s humor here
(20:57:34) paveljanik: I'll read meeting minutes and maybe there will be an answer or some "good grace" will shine from the minutes.
(20:57:43) CorNouws: mhu: read all his comments during the cc logs of the last years when pavel was cc member
(20:59:07) ***mhu seems not able to think around corners today, but sorry I don't understand these vague hints
(20:59:40) paveljanik: mhu: ! means negation (as you used the same syntax in your sentence).
(20:59:43) _Nesshof_: are we ready to finish the public session now
(21:00:04) paveljanik: I just want to say one more sentence.
(21:00:12) mhu: paveljanik: ah that explains it, my C/C++ parser still works
(21:00:24) Andreas_UX: but it's buggy ;-)
(21:00:47) CorNouws: ;-)
(21:00:47) erAck: paveljanik: go ahead.
(21:01:45) paveljanik: In my normal life, the "good grace" and "gentlemanship" force people to step down when they work for the other companies, lawyers can't work for both sides etc. This is normal and I expect the same from people with COI in our OOoCouncil.
(21:02:02) paveljanik: nothing else.
(21:02:05) paveljanik: Thanks.
(21:02:12) Andreas_UX: thank you!
(21:02:23) CorNouws: paveljanik: thanks, this is more clear
(21:02:27) erAck: paveljanik: ok, we heard you.
(21:02:28) christoph_n: yep, thanks
(21:02:33) mhu: that fits precisely to our first agenda item
(21:02:38) louis_to: indeed
(21:02:50) louis_to: shall we move to the formal and more private meeting then?
(21:03:02) mhu: yes, please
(21:03:03) Andreas_UX: yes please
(21:03:09) erAck: +1
(21:03:11) paveljanik: please sen the meeting minutes to me in CC:
(21:03:13) paveljanik: Thanks
(21:03:19) ohallot: +1
(21:03:23) louis_to: then let's go there, and accept MechtiIde's points and also paveljanik's
(21:03:33) Andreas_UX: ok
(21:03:45) Andreas_UX: see you on the other side
(21:03:46) louis_to: the public element is now closed; thanks
Community Council Session
(21:00:21) _Nesshof_: ok, pavel left, so are we ready to start the regular meeting ?
(21:04:15) ***christoph_n is ready
(21:04:33) Andreas_UX: dito
(21:04:52) ***mhu too
(21:05:03) louis_to: once again, the agenda is: <a href="http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Agenda">http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Agenda</a>
(21:05:30) louis_to: and as was mentioned, the first item is the one regarding the future of the CC, "where we stand," posted earlier today to the wiki agenda
(21:05:40) CorNouws: moment pls, will be back in a minute (kitchen calls me)
(21:05:53) louis_to: and effectively summarized by paveljanik as, resolving conflict of interest, or COI
(21:06:04) ***louis_to waits a minute
(21:06:28) erAck: For the protocol, let's first do 0 - "List of Action Items of previous meeting for approval", that should be a quick one.
(21:06:44) louis_to: erAck: agreed
(21:06:49) louis_to: let us wait a minute, however
(21:06:53) louis_to: for CorNouws to return
(21:08:44) ***mhu thinks, that minute is more than over now
(21:09:20) CorNouws: sorry - reading about bears and other drinks made me thirsty
(21:09:30) CorNouws: have some tea now ;-)
(21:09:43) Andreas_UX: i would prefer beers over bears ;-)
(21:10:04) christoph_n: Both can make you thirsty, I'm sure :-)
(21:10:04) louis_to: here in canada the two combine :-)
(21:10:06) CorNouws: ah, my fingers ehh key board again. thans for helping
(21:10:24) louis_to: do we agree on the minutes for the prior meeting?
(21:10:31) mhu: yes
(21:10:41) Andreas_UX: yes
(21:11:08) louis_to: +1
(21:11:11) CorNouws: OK
(21:11:13) christoph_n: +1
(21:11:16) _Nesshof_: +1
(21:11:27) ***erAck abstains as he didn't attend.
(21:11:41) ohallot: ok
(21:11:57) jsc [~firstname.lastname@example.org] hat den Raum betreten.
(21:12:06) louis_to: hello, juergen
(21:12:09) christoph_n: Hi Juergen!
(21:12:14) erAck: hi!
(21:12:18) Andreas_UX: hi!
(21:12:27) ohallot: Hi Juergen
(21:12:47) louis_to: minutes from prior meeting approved; notes that jsc has joined, leaving charles absent and stefan taxhet too, deputied by nesshoff
(21:13:14) jsc: Hi, sorry for being late, but I had to finished dinner first.
(21:13:15) louis_to: I move that we go on to item 00
(21:13:26) mhu: yes
(21:13:36) Andreas_UX: yes
(21:13:38) erAck: yes
(21:14:04) louis_to: I think that Pavel in the public part of this meeting hit it on the head
(21:14:15) mhu: (21:01:45) paveljanik: In my normal life, the "good grace" and "gentlemanship" force people to step down when they work for the other companies, lawyers can't work for both sides etc. This is normal and I expect the same from people with COI in our OOoCouncil.
(21:14:20) louis_to: when he described the problem being one of conflict of interest
(21:14:26) louis_to: thanks, mhu
(21:14:42) ***mhu promised that to pavel
(21:14:57) CorNouws: so ...
(21:15:00) CorNouws: I do realise that we are in a special situation, and that we need to talk about it. Therefore I did add it to the agenda, isn't it..
(21:15:32) CorNouws: But for me, there is no real conflict of interest at the moment.
(21:15:32) CorNouws: All the public outings (writings) from my side, are respectfull, with nuance, and hope for a better future then the years we can look back at.
(21:15:59) CorNouws: And I also see TDF in that light.
(21:16:25) louis_to: if I can clarify
(21:16:28) CorNouws: If all non-corporate members of the council together with big names from the past say that it is time that the community makes a different move, it is not the first logic step to leave that community, IMO
(21:16:29) louis_to: the issue is not your motives
(21:16:37) mhu: for me it is as simple as it was for pavel: you can't eat the cake and have it too, both at the same time
(21:17:16) CorNouws: Well, of course it was my great pleasure to try to explain ...
(21:17:25) louis_to: thank you
(21:17:30) CorNouws: and I have some more thoughts
(21:17:54) mhu: sorry for interrupting that was not my intent, go on, please
(21:17:56) louis_to: are they relevant to the matter at hand?
(21:18:49) CorNouws: louis_to: grmphh
(21:18:59) _Nesshof_: please let CorNouws speak for while
(21:20:07) _Nesshof_: s//a
(21:20:13) CorNouws: yes, it might not be that much words extra, but it's myabe not that what counts
(21:20:29) ***louis_to was teasing CorNouws
(21:21:49) jsc: In the end it's quite simple, people choose to fork the project and claim they were the community...
(21:21:50) CorNouws: we still have to find out how things really work out with roles and takst from different people, because it would surprise me if all individuals always are the same with work, feelings and attiture
(21:22:15) CorNouws: s/taskt/taks
(21:22:31) CorNouws: s/taskt/takst ;-)
(21:22:41) ***CorNouws en fin you get it
(21:22:55) christoph_n: Thanks Cor!
(21:23:06) CorNouws: And still AFAIK we have to do some fouther talking on a different level.
(21:23:23) CorNouws: but that obviously is something we will not have here
(21:23:46) Andreas_UX: what do you mean Cor?
(21:23:48) mhu: CorNouws: talk about what?
(21:24:02) jsc: ... but there are more people that belongs to the community
(21:24:46) ***jsc is slow because is typing on his iPhone
(21:25:54) Andreas_UX: that is also my impression since there are always some discussions on the lists which reflect that some are more or less surprised, confused etc
(21:26:07) Andreas_UX: some memebers
(21:26:32) CorNouws: Andreas_UX: take care, my typing errors are viral ;-)
(21:26:40) Andreas_UX: which sounds reasonable since things changed rapidly
(21:26:49) Andreas_UX: Core: indeed they are
(21:27:18) mhu: ohallot, CorNouws, christoph_n: could you shortly explain, in continuation of pavels question, how you think that you can be both on the governing body of a forked and competing project, and on this governing body, please?
(21:27:37) CorNouws: Andreas_UX: I am not surprised that community members are surprised too
(21:28:01) CorNouws: mhu: simple: I do not see it as competing. more as extending
(21:28:09) mhu: haha
(21:28:10) CorNouws: wrong word, need my dictionary
(21:28:19) CorNouws: what haha
(21:28:21) CorNouws: ?
(21:28:23) ohallot: do we have competition?
(21:28:32) christoph_n: Good question... I think not, or?
(21:28:54) erAck: The conflict most see is that LO is a different product with different interests, regardless of personal motives or attitude of those involved. TDF says they want to bring OOo "further to the future", but so far they only forked. Code-wise and infrastructure-wise.
(21:28:54) ohallot: because if we have not, then there is no COI
(21:29:00) CorNouws: maybe additional is better than extending
(21:29:05) jsc: In the end it's the same as with go-oo, I respect people but I see the conflict of interest
(21:29:09) mhu: you're not competing? can have that on paper writing?
(21:29:13) Andreas_UX: are you serious? we have competition or we will have soon at conferences, with customers, with community newbies etc
(21:29:47) CorNouws: erAck: yep, but that was not out of main will, but just to asure that we have a ground to start the foundation
(21:29:59) CorNouws: see the invitation - however you call it - to Oracle
(21:30:09) mhu: haha
(21:30:10) ohallot: TDF is not asking for competion, we invited you to join
(21:30:15) Andreas_UX: please don't start that again
(21:30:25) erAck: CorNouws: you could had have a foundation without a competing product.
(21:30:36) CorNouws: yes, why not?
(21:31:01) CorNouws: or am I naive (still) ?
(21:31:13) CorNouws: or just idealistic, still
(21:31:15) Andreas_UX: good question Cor ;-)
(21:31:28) jsc: Well the TDF choose the fork
(21:31:48) CorNouws: and for me, ideasls do not stop at the door or any company, maybe that is a problem ;-)
(21:32:17) Andreas_UX: the point is that an amount X of the community have chosen to go a different path, not judging, the rest remains unchanged
(21:32:55) CorNouws: so therefore we need to find out where there realy is a conflict of interest
(21:32:58) Andreas_UX: the different path is reflected in marketing, code, contribution rules, etc
(21:33:14) CorNouws: why or where I should not ne able to help in the OOo community any more
(21:33:54) CorNouws: s/ne/be
(21:33:59) Andreas_UX: ... you guys even have an own agenda for conferences now. what will you promote there?
(21:34:12) Andreas_UX: OpenOffice.org or LibreOffice?
(21:34:15) mhu: you can not eat the cake (go away and set up a competing project) and keep it to (try to govern the project that you were just leaving)
(21:34:29) CorNouws: working on a product in our mutual "office-cloud" (R)
(21:34:52) louis_to: CorNouws: you are entitled to work with the OOo community but your role in the CC can cause confusion, as it is a representative role
(21:35:07) erAck: CorNouws: not helping OOo is not the point. The COI is having a seat both in TDF and in the OOoCC.
(21:35:22) louis_to: The point is to reduce, as much as possible, confusion and conflict of apparent intention
(21:35:45) Andreas_UX: please could someone else say something? christoph what do you think?
(21:35:57) CorNouws: I am member of different political parties here, that for me serve different goals
(21:36:06) christoph_n: First, I second Cor's points ...
(21:36:10) Andreas_UX: that's weird :-)
(21:36:21) Andreas_UX: not christoph ment
(21:36:31) ***mhu had already asked that question to all three, and have received no (acceptable) answer
(21:36:35) jsc: Maybe people should have this question before they decide to fork...
(21:36:53) louis_to: the point is not your personal motives.
(21:36:57) christoph_n: ... to me, there is not that much difference concerning the community we provide guidance to.
(21:37:12) louis_to: the point is apparent and evident motives and identity
(21:37:22) louis_to: you now represent TDF and LibreOffice
(21:37:30) louis_to: these are distinct from OpenOffice.org
(21:37:32) jsc: ... asked ...
(21:37:46) ***CorNouws great, first time we have a real discussion here. Would have loved to see that happen when we talked - or tried to - about a foundation in the past :-\
(21:37:47) louis_to: for you to represeent OOo in the CC is therefore quite confusing
(21:38:25) _Nesshof_: member of diffenent parties: tss, tss, never saw a political party, which allows that
(21:38:44) ohallot: Our presence in OOC is a good opportunity to keep door open to both projects.
(21:38:53) CorNouws: that is nothing confusing compared to the things we all have to find out the nextt months
(21:38:54) jsc: sorry guys, but sounds indeed a little bit naive
(21:39:47) _Nesshof_: CorNouws: I'm fine with that, but during those months you should not serve both parties
(21:40:39) CorNouws: I am trying to serve our "office-cloud" ... but I understand whay you want to say
(21:40:40) _Nesshof_: I'm looking forward to the results of that experiment, but please don't try to serve both parties at the same time
(21:41:02) Andreas_UX: hey guys, are you just being bulish? Honestly!
(21:41:15) christoph_n: Andreas_UX: I think not :-)
(21:41:33) ***erAck is puzzled how "fraktionsuebergreifender Ausschuss" would translate to English
(21:41:43) Andreas_UX: I see what you might be up to but that seems to be so much beyond realism
(21:41:49) mhu: there's nothing funny, actually
(21:41:50) erAck hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Lost terminal).
(21:42:00) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: I agree that it is not an easy situation
(21:42:54) CorNouws: and will take care of your advice
(21:42:57) christoph_n: _Nesshof_: Thinking about the whole community, what do you think would be the best way to deal with that?
(21:43:01) erAck [~er@nat/sun/x-oefqfydztdkludml] hat den Raum betreten.
(21:43:15) CorNouws: erAck: was looking for his dictionary ?
(21:43:20) _Nesshof_: erAck: ausschusse sind immer fraktionsuebergreifend
(21:43:53) Andreas_UX: be consequent! take your chances with LibreOffice and see how things work out. But please be more realistic.
(21:43:53) ***erAck hates UIs closing windows when selecting the wrong context menu entry
(21:44:19) christoph_n: erAck: And there is still *_UX around ;-)
(21:44:22) Andreas_UX: that is what you guys wanted, right? or the part of the community you say you represent.
(21:44:45) jsc: Christoph_n: not all people have really understand the current situation
(21:45:17) ohallot: well, you see, the reality is that i only see CorNows, christoph_n and ohallot as the community memebers and all other are now Oracle employees so I take it as Oracle wants us to get out
(21:45:35) _Nesshof_: christoph_n: for answering this I'd need to know the real agenda for this experiment
(21:46:05) christoph_n: ohallot: I don't know ... we should try to better explain our aims.
(21:46:13) _Nesshof_: ohallot: who took the first step ?
(21:46:22) mhu: ohallot: you have chosen to leave, so we wish you good luck, but please leave; and that has nothing to do with Oracle; that is my personal opinion
(21:46:34) jsc: ohallot: it might look so but I think it's different...
(21:46:44) CorNouws: depents at what event you look at... sorry Martin, that is what I honestly feel
(21:46:59) Andreas_UX: ohallot: I could actually turn your argument around and make "TDF wants to sabbotage OpenOffice.org" which i am not really thinking but you get the point I hope
(21:47:41) _Nesshof_: CorNouws: understood
(21:47:45) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: if "the real agenda for this experiment" is not clear to you and makes you concerned, we definitely have to talk about that
(21:47:50) CorNouws: and soon.
(21:48:12) CorNouws: Sorry: i've had the possibility to have contact with some of you guys in Hamburg, but only few
(21:48:18) CorNouws: last weeks were busy for me
(21:48:26) jsc: Many of us worked on the project before Sun and before Oracle. Please don't come us with this phrase
(21:50:12) louis_to: I would like to propose that the TDF members of the CC consider the points those of us who have not joined TDF have made about conflict of interest and confusion
(21:50:42) ***CorNouws on the other hand, the few things, very few compared to many others, so must not be to difficult to follow, could have been clear, I hope - presuming people know I don't cheat
(21:51:04) ***CorNouws few thing I wronte on lists, I menat
(21:52:08) louis_to: I would further ask them to resign their offices, so as to remove the apparent conflict of interest their current representational roles produce
(21:52:44) CorNouws: louis_to: ok with your first proposal, and I would like to talk more at least with Marting
(21:53:05) louis_to: okay, can we set a time deadline for this? There is a lot going on
(21:53:07) CorNouws: not with your second, obvious, that is what I tried to explain
(21:53:23) louis_to: and I would ask then for Monday this coming week for final decision on your part
(21:53:26) CorNouws: louis_to: talking dealines :-)
(21:53:27) louis_to: or Tuesday, at most
(21:53:31) louis_to: :-)
(21:53:32) CorNouws: sorry, could not resist
(21:53:38) louis_to: touché
(21:53:45) louis_to: but this is actually very important
(21:53:52) CorNouws: pff
(21:54:13) louis_to: it is of utomost importance that we do not confuse users and contributors as to what is what, as to the identity of OpenOffice.org--or of your organization
(21:54:22) CorNouws: I will contact Martin to make an appointment and that must for me be possible next week
(21:54:40) CorNouws: the appointment, not the initial contct of course
(21:54:41) louis_to: and so it is in our interests--all of our interests--to do that, to make things clear
(21:54:44) erAck: is there any chance to meet face2face and discuss some things?
(21:54:46) christoph_n: CorNouws: If I can help anyhow ... I'm happy to join.
(21:55:10) ***louis_to notes he'll be in Madrid end of October, but that's too late, I think
(21:55:12) jsc: I would like to join if possible
(21:55:25) CorNouws: erAck: my yacht still is not in the water, so we would be bound to land
(21:55:28) louis_to: can I suggest then we have a separate meeting Monday or Tuesday?
(21:55:44) _Nesshof_: my boat is still in water
(21:55:48) ***mhu wants to remind of pavels comment, of what is expected ...
(21:55:51) mhu: (21:01:45) paveljanik: In my normal life, the "good grace" and "gentlemanship" force people to step down when they work for the other companies, lawyers can't work for both sides etc. This is normal and I expect the same from people with COI in our OOoCouncil.
(21:56:27) CorNouws: mhu: thanks. I hope he understands my situation when reading the logs
(21:57:38) ***mhu thinks, the question is not whether pavel understands, but what the answer is, actually
(21:58:06) christoph_n: erAck: Concerning your question, would be hard for me ... but there seems to be a meeting in Hamburg anyway with some people who share the foundation idea. It would be great if some of you could join (but I don't remember when and if it has been arranged at all).
(21:58:45) ***louis_to is a little surprised at the lack of acceptance of the new reality, that there is the OpenOffice.org project and TDF and LibreOffice, and that they differ and have different things characterizing them
(21:59:17) louis_to: christoph_n: the issue is not to delay; it is to act on as expeditiously as possible.
(21:59:42) louis_to: your role in the Document Foundation and LibreOffice makes your role as a representative in the OOo CC untenable and impossible
(22:00:01) Andreas_UX: I would support that. I think that the more we discuss the more we will harden the fronts
(22:00:17) louis_to: it causes confusion, it is a plain conflict of interest, as TDF split from OOo
(22:00:34) erAck: christoph_n: I was thinking more of a meeting with the current CC members, regardless whether some will resign or not.
(22:01:07) jsc: well I have to agree here in the same way as I have voted against Thorsten who worked on the go-oo fork
(22:01:25) Andreas_UX: that is a good point
(22:01:28) christoph_n: erAck: I know, I know ... but if we chose Hamburg, it is also some hundreds of kilometers for me :-( Usually I plan that some weeks/months in advance
(22:01:33) Andreas_UX: why should that be different
(22:02:28) Andreas_UX: ooh come on christoph, your relatives will be happy you helping them out rebuilding the house again ;-)
(22:02:58) christoph_n: Andreas_UX: And they know that I am still trying to somehow finish our flat :-)
(22:03:14) Andreas_UX: you're not done yet ;-)
(22:03:25) jsc: ... independent of personal relationships
(22:04:07) mhu: have I mentioned my new mantra: you can't eat the cake, and keep it at the same time...that is a conflict of interest
(22:04:24) ***jsc is still to slow today...
(22:05:08) ***mhu would like to leave in 10min
(22:05:16) ***jsc but still love my iPhone
(22:05:39) Andreas_UX: I just think that the Community Counsil as it is right now does not make any sense at all. It would be benumbed due to ongoing discussions and disagreement
(22:06:30) CorNouws: Martin and me will meet (skype) this weekend, as promised
(22:06:38) CorNouws: I think that is a good start to sort this out
(22:06:48) CorNouws: sorry that it is all a bit difficult
(22:06:51) christoph_n: Andreas_UX: To be honest, we experienced these differences in the past, too.
(22:07:11) Andreas_UX: I knew you would say that :-)
(22:07:18) louis_to: Then let us agree that Tuesday is deadline for resolving this.
(22:07:26) christoph_n: Andreas_UX: It seems we work together far too long ;-)
(22:07:35) Andreas_UX: indeed
(22:07:39) CorNouws: christoph_n: Was Andreas informed about how things often were here?
(22:07:42) mhu: ...but now you're on the board of a competing organization, and cannot eat the cake and have it too
(22:07:50) ***erAck throws in a philosophical view: you still have the cake while you're digesting.
(22:08:14) CorNouws: mhu: pls, be patient
(22:08:19) louis_to: folks, please, let's stick to the matter at hand, not to the cake on the dessert tray and in our stomachs
(22:08:27) Andreas_UX: +1
(22:08:37) louis_to: to summarize,
(22:08:46) christoph_n: CorNouws: We had many talks concerning the UX community and the difficulties in the projects we worked in. So I expect, that he knows our concerns ...
(22:08:51) ***mhu is indeed impatient, sorry for that; need to leave soon anyway
(22:09:33) CorNouws: mhu: sorry that I didn't write 'try to be' ..
(22:09:57) Andreas_UX: Cor: I really understand your concerns but I really do not support "the way you doing things about them"
(22:10:02) mhu: CorNouws: don't worry, I'm not sooo impatient
(22:10:11) louis_to: mhu: I am too
(22:10:20) louis_to: and would like to resolve this. By tuesday, i can wait
(22:10:39) mhu: tuesday is fine for me, too
(22:10:40) louis_to: but the issue is of importance, and I do not want actual or possible confusion to obtain here
(22:10:49) louis_to: the point is quite clear
(22:11:10) louis_to: if the TDF members do not disassociate themselves from the Doc. found. then they must resign
(22:11:14) louis_to: by Tuesday
(22:11:27) louis_to: I doubt we can have consensus on that point
(22:11:38) louis_to: however, the situation here is extraordinary
(22:12:07) erAck: So, we now know (or not) Cor's opinion about conflict of interest. How about Christoph and Olivier?
(22:12:15) louis_to: We are giving the TDF members the time to understand the weight of their action and to act gracefully
(22:12:54) jsc: Maybe people should think about a new LO community instead of the OOo community that still exists but is maybe smaller...
(22:13:03) christoph_n: erAck: As I said earlier, I second Cor's points.
(22:13:39) ohallot: no COI for me. Au contraire.
(22:13:46) ***mhu needs to leave in about a minute ...
(22:14:32) CorNouws: thanks for the summary and understanding Louis
(22:14:43) ***jsc is thinking about the meaning of COI
(22:14:49) CorNouws: I will talk with Martin, explaining and listening
(22:15:00) erAck: jsc: conflict of interest
(22:15:28) ***jsc ups I meant interpretation
(22:15:30) louis_to: CorNouws: great; I would hope Martin can communicate the results of this discussoin, but leave it to his and your discretion
(22:15:51) louis_to: for now, I would ask that we adjourn this meeting, as some of us have to leave quite soon
(22:16:00) ***jsc is surprised how different it can be
(22:16:14) louis_to: and that we wait until Tuesday, when we might have an emergency meeting (TBD)
(22:16:18) ohallot: adjourn: +1
(22:16:23) Andreas_UX: +1
(22:16:28) _Nesshof_: ok
(22:16:32) erAck: ok
(22:16:34) jsc: +1
(22:16:39) mhu: okay, bye then
(22:16:47) erAck: bye
(22:16:55) christoph_n: okay
(22:16:56) ohallot: bye
(22:17:01) Andreas_UX: bye bye
(22:17:06) ohallot hat den Raum verlassen.
(22:17:18) mhu hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Quit: Leaving.).
(22:17:18) jsc: bye
(22:17:43) louis_to: bye all
(22:17:54) louis_to: meeting adjourned