Difference between revisions of "Community Council Minutes 20080522"
(Added CC template)
|Line 1:||Line 1:|
==IRC log, Community Council Meeting 2008-05-22, 18:30 UTC==
==IRC log, Community Council Meeting 2008-05-22, 18:30 UTC==
Latest revision as of 14:42, 30 May 2010
IRC log, Community Council Meeting 2008-05-22, 18:30 UTC
- Sophie Gautier (sophi)
- Martin Hollmichel (_Nesshof__)
- Matthias Huetsch (mhu/mh2)
- Pavel Janík (paveljanik)
- John McCreesh (jpmcc)
- Cor Nouws (CorNouws)
- Stefan Taxhet (stx12)
- Louis Suarez-Potts
IRC meeting commences 18:41 UTC (timestamp is +0100)
(18:41:02) jpmcc: Stefan, do you want to chair the mtg in LS-P's absence?
(18:42:24) stx12: jpmcc: feel free to go ahead - you were mentioned first ;-)
(18:43:14) jpmcc: Item 1 Minutes of the previous meeting - none
(18:43:58) CorNouws: Item 2: AI's
(18:44:06) jpmcc: Item 2 Actions - let's have a quick look through the IRC log...
(18:44:36) sophi: jpmcc: the first for me should be minutes of the meeting and I accept the task
(18:44:44) _Nesshof_: jpmcc: how will do today minutes ?
(18:45:00) ***_Nesshof_ is too slow
(18:45:12) ***_Nesshof_ steps back
(18:45:32) jpmcc: sophi: thank you
(18:45:36) sophi: _Nesshof_: me, I propose myself
(18:45:48) _Nesshof_: :-)
(18:46:06) jpmcc: The only AIs I can see from the IRC log are for Louis, unless anyone else can see some?
(18:46:39) CorNouws: We talked about the AB, invite them to something
(18:47:18) sophi: CorNouws: this is in the todo list, invite them to say what they are exactly doing :)
(18:47:20) jpmcc: CorNouws: I think that's on the Agenda for tonight
(18:47:56) CorNouws: jpmcc: Ah, I see
(18:48:23) jpmcc: OK, moving on to tonight's items: Elections.
(18:48:54) jpmcc: > Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: > [...] > >> As to elections. I'd like to propose for this night's meeting that >> we broaden the eligible candidates to include not just accepted >> project leads (current state) but also leads of the Incubator and >> Native Language and any other similar category, though addition of >> such as yet nonexistent ones can be done on a case-by-case basis. >
(18:49:30) sophi: jpmcc: I second Stefan opinion
(18:49:57) mhu: I also second Stefan
(18:50:04) paveljanik: +1
(18:50:12) CorNouws: sophi: what about Louis' further explanation?
(18:50:12) Thalion72: +1 (to stefan)
(18:50:15) stx12: sophi. mhu: louis clarified what he meant
(18:50:37) stx12: i incorrectly understood that he would like to change the structure
(18:51:02) sophi: stx12: oups sorry didn't have the time to read his last mail
(18:51:09) mhu: so, can you quickly update us on lsp's proposal what he really meant?
(18:51:37) jpmcc: mhu: I don't understand it
(18:52:01) ***mhu sitting in another live meeting and can't read long emails right now, sorry
(18:52:05) stx12: louis wants to add the leads of the category to the people eligible for a cc seat (beyond the project leads)
(18:52:35) stx12: et's first discuss the idea of including in "accepted projects" the leads of Incubator and NLC categories. (Note, I'm lead of Incubator and co-lead of NLC but am already eligible, via Website and Community Manager. But one day I'll be replaced in those other projects. And by NLC leads I mean Charles and me, not the many NLC project leads.)
(18:52:50) stx12: that's the quote
(18:53:20) sophi: NLC leads are project leads of accepted projects
(18:53:51) Thalion72: sophi: no - formally not
(18:53:52) mhu: but that was what everybody did understand: he wants to change the rules; i cannot accept that with only 2 hours preparation
(18:54:04) stx12: yes, but there is a lead of the category - which is not eligible under our current charta
(18:54:24) Thalion72: mhu: no matter if we talk about more "project" or just "cathegory" leads .. it is a change of rules
(18:55:02) sophi: Thalion72: yes I agree
(18:55:13) stx12: yes, but do we feel comfortable to decide whether we would like to proceed with the change or do we need 2 more week to make up our mind?
(18:55:13) CorNouws: thalion72: That's true
(18:55:20) Thalion72: so - at the moment we would get 2 more people being eligible - but we would need to change the charter for that
(18:55:37) stx12: Thalion72: actually one 1
(18:55:41) stx12: Thalion72: actually only 1
(18:55:46) Thalion72: correct
(18:55:48) CorNouws: stx12: do we need the change for this elections, or is next time also OK?
(18:56:22) stx12: i think louis intend was to do it prior to current elections
(18:56:49) CorNouws: stx12: But di we see the/a need?
(18:57:29) Thalion72: CorNouws: there is a need, if we do not have enough candidates in project leads
(18:57:37) jpmcc: I think in principle that *all* community members should be elected.
(18:57:40) CorNouws left the room (quit: Remote closed the connection).
(18:58:03) stx12: i don't know how easy it will be to find candidates amoung the leads. and one category lead might be a strong candidate.
(18:58:03) Thalion72: jpmcc: hmm?
(18:58:21) paveljanik: if this should delay the vote, I vote against changing the rules now. I really would like to see new voting and new blood...
(18:58:53) jpmcc: Thallion72: I don;t think someone from the volunteers should automatically sit on the CC because they have a specific role
(18:59:00) Thalion72: stx12: it is never easy to find candidates - but we cannot tell if we never start looking for candidates in public
(18:59:49) Thalion72: jpmcc: we have nobody from the volunteers, who is automatic here
(19:00:17) Thalion72: btw - I agree to pavel - so I do not need two weeks to decide about the proposal :)
(19:00:23) stx12: in public? th erules are quite easy. ask on the project leads leads list for candidates from the accepted projects and from the NLC.
(19:01:01) stx12: Thalion72: you are against the proposal or against a dependency between elections and the proposal.
(19:01:03) Thalion72: stx12: yes - ok let's say on the list (not in public)
(19:01:23) jpmcc: Thallion72: If we accept Louis' proposal, then the Head of the NLC and the Head of Incubators ???? will automatically be on the cc
(19:01:32) Thalion72: stx12: against the dependency between elections and proposal
(19:01:47) stx12: jpmcc: no, they would be eligeble
(19:01:53) Thalion72: /reads the proposal again
(19:02:32) stx12: in plain words: charles is no project lead (afaik) but lead of the category NLC.
(19:02:47) jpmcc: stx12: you are correct (after re-reading the proposal)
(19:02:51) mhu: I still think that such a proposal cannot be voted upon with only 2 hours of prep, which I did not have.
(19:03:10) jpmcc: stx12: I though Charles was co-lead of the FR NL-P?
(19:03:19) Thalion72: mhu: so for the moment -1 to the proposal
(19:03:32) sophi: jpmcc: no, he is not
(19:03:59) _Nesshof_: sophi: is there a problem to made him a co lead ?
(19:04:00) stx12: i see a difference between -1 and "let's table it until the next meeting"
(19:04:21) sophi: _Nesshof_: not at all, provided he accepts :)
(19:04:35) mhu: stx12: thanks, that is what I wanted to say
(19:04:44) Thalion72: stx12: ok .. so let me say I officially abstain
(19:05:15) Thalion72: and looking forward to vote again, when we had more time to think about it
(19:05:19) stx12: i would propose we give people time until next meeting and officially vote on the proposal then.
(19:05:27) jpmcc: stx12: +1
(19:05:31) sophi: Thalion72: same for me, I need time :)
(19:05:44) mhu: stx12: +1
(19:05:49) sophi: stx12: +1
(19:06:18) ***_Nesshof_ will get grey in the CC
(19:06:22) _Nesshof_: +1
(19:06:26) Thalion72: +1
(19:06:46) stx12: we lost cor?
(19:07:00) Thalion72: yes, seems so
(19:07:06) paveljanik: if people need time, +1. But it SHOULD NOT DELAY the voting...
(19:07:22) jpmcc: ï»¿OK, was there anything else to cover under the topic of "Elections"?
(19:08:04) stx12: i guess we have a quorum now with pavel; so louis will move forward with elections and sophie will see whether there is a need a need for a co-lead.
(19:08:07) Thalion72: let us please vote on pavel's claim: status of Louis' proposal should not delay current elections
(19:09:21) CorNouws [firstname.lastname@example.org] entered the room.
(19:09:35) jpmcc: Thallion72: so your proposal is we start the election process immediately using the current rules
(19:09:52) CorNouws: * Sorry, was fighting a unknown (for me) system
(19:09:53) Thalion72: yes
(19:10:08) stx12: jpmcc: yes, and that's my understanding too
(19:10:12) paveljanik: and sophie will solve the status of NLC category lead so..
(19:10:28) jpmcc: CorNous: we have agreed to defer Louis' proposal to change the rules to the next meeting to let people give it proper consideration.
(19:10:32) ***sophi missing something here
(19:10:43) CorNouws: jpmcc: OK
(19:10:50) sophi: charles is co-lead of the NLC category
(19:11:14) sophi: he is not co-lead of the FR nl project
(19:11:29) Thalion72: and FR-nl-project actually has a coLead
(19:11:38) sophi: so, I think I misunderstand what you said
(19:12:06) sophi: is that right?
(19:12:06) paveljanik: sophi: can fr project has second co-lead?
(19:12:39) sophi: yes, of course
(19:12:53) paveljanik: naah, I think +1 for Louis proposal is the right answer. I hate such workarounds...
(19:12:54) ***Thalion72 think, that the discussion is going in a completely wrong direction
(19:13:04) paveljanik: Thalion72: +1
(19:13:19) Thalion72: do we really try to find ways to get "our preffered" candidates into the council?
(19:13:21) ***sophi is lost and doesn't where it goes
(19:14:03) paveljanik: Thalion72: "prefered" is in quotes? ;-) Yes, Charles is my preferred candidate ;-))
(19:14:26) paveljanik: I do not want to discriminate Charles (as the current category co-lead) to be voted.
(19:14:33) paveljanik: I will certainly NOT vote for him
(19:14:56) jpmcc: If we are going to change the rules, then we could propose that an elected Head of the NL-C is de facto a CC member
(19:15:10) paveljanik: no
(19:15:17) paveljanik: he is eligible.
(19:15:45) jpmcc: paveljanik: yes, that's a better idea
(19:16:30) paveljanik: OK, we should move forward...
(19:16:31) paveljanik: :-(
(19:16:41) jpmcc: OK do we want to proceed now with elections on the current rules?
(19:16:51) CorNouws: jpmcc: Yes
(19:17:10) Thalion72: jpmcc: yes
(19:17:29) jpmcc: others +1 / -1 please?
(19:17:33) sophi: jpmcc: yes
(19:17:36) paveljanik: yes, definitely, now.
(19:17:52) mhu: yes
(19:17:52) stx12: yes
(19:18:34) jpmcc: Missing mhu & _Nesshof_ ??
(19:18:45) jpmcc: mhu: sorry
(19:18:51) ***stx12 misses only _Nesshof_
(19:18:57) ***mhu thinks I have already voted: yes
(19:19:16) _Nesshof_: yes
(19:19:36) jpmcc: OK. Two AIs then:
(19:20:09) jpmcc: * All: read LS-P's proposal again; debate on list; cometo next meeting ready to vote
(19:20:27) jpmcc: * LS-P: organise the elections asap
(19:20:53) jpmcc: Next item on the agenda: Trademark
(19:21:33) jpmcc: Does anyone want to talk to this item?
(19:21:53) Thalion72: I think, nobody but Louis can give an update on this
(19:22:07) CorNouws: Yes, to make a start with it, definitely - or did we have a start already?
(19:22:15) Thalion72: this is Louis' AI for a long time
(19:22:17) sophi: jpmcc: it's an old item from Louis to propose a trademark charter near the Mozilla one
(19:22:37) jpmcc: sophi: do you have a link to the proposal?
(19:22:43) CorNouws: Has nothing to do with attacking all kind of abuse?
(19:22:49) Thalion72: there is no proposal
(19:22:53) sophi: jpmcc: no, he didn't wrote it I think
(19:23:19) CorNouws: OK, pass it on to next meeting then
(19:23:21) Thalion72: CorNouws: we first need to define what is abuse and what is correct use
(19:23:26) jpmcc: CorNouws: I think we need to have a formal policy before we can accuse people of abusing it ...
(19:23:40) jpmcc: OK, another AI...
(19:23:46) CorNouws: My answer for eralier ;-)
(19:24:09) jpmcc: * LS-P: circulate a trandemark proposal for consideration on the list by the CC in time for th next meeting
(19:24:52) jpmcc: Next agenda item: "Update OOoCon2008". Who put this on the agenda?
(19:25:34) stx12: i didn't; but i would be interested anyway ;-)
(19:26:11) stx12: at least i don't know when/how we can take session proposals
(19:26:53) jpmcc: Quick update then: you will have seen the CfP has gone out. We have abandoned hope of using the AB as a route to getting money from sponsors so Peter will be contacting potential sponsors (including Microsoft) directly.
(19:27:05) _Nesshof_: people are also asking how to get funding to get to OOoCon
(19:28:52) jpmcc: _Nesshof_: speakers can submit a request when they submit their proposals. There is no decision about how we can extend the bursary scheme to others. The priority is to establish a budget, so we have some idea how much funding we can use.
(19:29:01) sophi: jpmcc: do we still have a CFP in two times ? one by the end of may (if I remember well) the other (I don't remember)
(19:29:13) jpmcc: sophi: yes :-(
(19:29:39) _Nesshof_: jpmcc: is that documented for the speakers somewhere ?
(19:29:41) sophi: jpmcc: do we get some proposal yet?
(19:30:26) jpmcc: _Nesshof_: Yes http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2008/cfp/index.html#bursary
(19:30:29) stx12: i was not aware that the form is in place:
(19:30:30) stx12: http://survey.services.openoffice.org/forms/public/survey.php?name=CfP2008
(19:31:19) jpmcc: stx12: yes, it has been there for a week or two.
(19:31:56) _Nesshof_: jpmcc: this link is quite vague on how to proceed
(19:32:34) jpmcc: _Nesshof_: OK, I will strengthen the wording.
(19:33:01) jpmcc: Is it worth another posting to announce@ ?
(19:33:27) paveljanik: yes
(19:33:30) CorNouws: jpmcc: yes
(19:33:36) jpmcc: OK, will do.
(19:34:03) jpmcc: stx12: Have we any news from Sun about sponsorship?
(19:34:22) stx12: jpmcc: i'm in contact with peter.
(19:34:30) jpmcc: stx12: Good, thanks
(19:34:58) jpmcc: The only other piece of news is that the team have come up with cool OOoCon logog including a cute panda ;-)
(19:35:16) jpmcc: logos, not logog ?
(19:35:46) jpmcc: Any other questions on OOoCon?
(19:36:13) Thalion72: no
(19:36:14) sophi: jpmcc: do we have proposals yet ?
(19:36:38) jpmcc: sophi: I'll check offline
(19:36:51) sophi: jpmcc: ok, thanks, no more questions :)
(19:37:02) jpmcc: Next agenda item: Community Growth Plan ("year plan") - CorNouws, I think this is yours?
(19:37:55) CorNouws: Louis wanted to preprae something first ...)
(19:38:03) CorNouws: so skip till next time, IMO
(19:38:19) jpmcc: Wait, we have another long email from him...
(19:38:53) jpmcc: The bit he would like us to consider tonight is: "Cor has been pushing us to come up with a community growth plan. I'd like to propose a group from CC including him, John, Stefan, Sophie or Pavel, and me (or a others, instead, though I think we need those members) to work on this. We can use the wikis, and the idea would be to examine where we are going as a community and were we want to go. "
(19:39:05) CorNouws: Can't read my mail now, > next meeting is better.
(19:39:41) Thalion72: jpmcc: in general +1 for the proposal of forming this group
(19:39:42) CorNouws: jpmcc: Thanks for quoting. SOunds reasonable to me.
(19:40:34) sophi: jpmcc: +1 for me too
(19:40:36) Thalion72: ... I hat a brief look at the mail (not read in detail) but I get the impression, that the ideas cover the work of some projects (e.g. education)
(19:40:57) Thalion72: what is not a real problem - but those projects should be involved in the plan ;)
(19:41:30) CorNouws: jpmcc: +1
(19:41:49) jpmcc: OK, the proposal is we have a team look at this and develop a proposal. Core members are Louis, me, Stefan, Sophie, Cor, plus any toher community members they choose to involve
(19:42:04) Thalion72: jpmcc: +1
(19:42:10) CorNouws: +1
(19:42:14) sophi: jpmcc: +1
(19:43:08) jpmcc: Votes from stx12 mhu _Nesshof_ paveljanik please...
(19:43:24) stx12: +1
(19:43:27) _Nesshof_: +1
(19:44:23) jpmcc: paveljanik please...
(19:44:28) paveljanik: +1
(19:44:39) jpmcc: mhu please...
(19:44:49) paveljanik: jpmcc: popping up a private window in the middle of +1 doesn't help ;-)
(19:45:18) jpmcc: paveljanik: "I hate IRC :-)"
(19:45:28) CorNouws: (C)
(19:46:12) jpmcc: OK, moving on. Next agenda / flame item: "Ask the AB to define clearly its role in OOo". Who put this on the agenda?
(19:46:24) sophi: me :)
(19:46:32) mh2 [n=matthias@nat/sun/x-8a6546623edd1a71] entered the room.
(19:46:33) paveljanik: We should ignore AB, not spend our time on it...
(19:47:14) Thalion72: paveljanik: interesting idea :)
(19:47:16) ***mh2 is back; connection broken.
(19:47:32) jpmcc: OK, I propose we ask LS-P to write formally to the chair of the AB asking them for their terms of reference
(19:47:40) ***mh2 was called mhu in former times :-(
(19:47:55) sophi: paveljanik: no, they have to statute if they are here or not and not pop up from time to time
(19:49:20) Thalion72: jpmcc: should LS-P write or rather the council?
(19:49:30) CorNouws: jpmcc: and people interested can have contact first on the wording
(19:49:45) paveljanik: +1 on any action item. We should not comment something that is outside our project...
(19:49:49) paveljanik: -1
(19:49:51) paveljanik: not +1 ;-)
(19:50:01) sophi: Thalion72: I think the CC
(19:50:33) CorNouws: paveljanik: IMO it is enough in the project to be of (some/little) concern
(19:50:40) jpmcc: paveljanik: we have appointed a representative of the CC on the AB so we are already involved...
(19:50:41) Thalion72: paveljanik: did the AB state that it is outside the project?
(19:51:03) paveljanik: Thalion72: did anyone state they are part of the project? Did CC?
(19:51:08) ***mh2 is asking himself when this meeting might end; need to get home sometime soon.
(19:51:24) jpmcc: mh2: real soon now
(19:51:40) mh2: jpmcc: thanks, appreciated.
(19:51:54) sophi: jpmcc: yes I agree, I can prepare something, but I need the CC aproval on the content and the wording ;)
(19:52:03) Thalion72: paveljanik: hmm .. I don't really know - I'll need to scan the archives
(19:52:28) CorNouws: sophi: pls do, right wording is more important than speed in this case
(19:52:31) Thalion72: sophi: +1
(19:52:50) jpmcc: I propose we action Sophie to draft a letter on the list so we can formally vote on it next meeting
(19:53:05) sophi: jpmcc: ok AI for me
(19:53:11) CorNouws: jpmcc: +1
(19:54:24) jpmcc: That's the last item on the agenda. Is there any other business urgent enough to keep mh2 on-line:-) ?
(19:54:52) jpmcc: Silence means no...
(19:54:58) mhu left the room (quit: Read error: 113 (No route to host)).
(19:55:06) jpmcc: ...going once...
(19:55:12) jpmcc: ...going twice...
(19:55:13) Thalion72: no other business ;)
(19:55:14) paveljanik: no ;-)
(19:55:28) paveljanik: ok, so again the result of the meeting is nothing.
(19:55:32) sophi: jpmcc: ok for me, my next item is to eat ;)
(19:55:38) jpmcc: ...going three times. Good night everybody and thanks for attending.
(19:55:44) mh2: okay, bye everyone, and good night.
(19:55:51) _Nesshof_: ok, by
(19:55:56) mh2 left the room.
(19:55:57) paveljanik: bye
(19:55:58) paveljanik left the room ("Leaving").
(19:56:02) sophi: bye all
(19:56:04) _Nesshof_ left the room.
(19:56:11) CorNouws: bye all, next time with good preparations (read and answer mail ALL) we will have 'results' :-)