View source for Community Council Minutes 20080109

From Apache OpenOffice Wiki

← Community Council Minutes 20080109

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

• The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Users.
• You must confirm your email address before editing pages. Please set and validate your email address through your user preferences.

---

You can view and copy the source of this page.

== Log, Community Council Meeting 2008-01-09 20:00 UTC == ===Attendees=== * Sophie Gautier (sophi) * Martin Hollmichel (_Nesshof__) * André Schnabel (Thalion72) * Louis Suarez-Potts (louis_to) * Stefan Taxhet (stx12) * Matthias Huetsch (mhu) * Cor Nouws (cornouw1, CorNouws) * Pavel Janík (paveljanik) * John McCreesh (jpmcc) ---- IRC meeting commences 20:00 UTC (more or less) <pre> louis_to so, let's start. Stefan (st) will be a few minutes late, he indicated louis_to First, welcome CorNouws! Thalion72 Welcome Cor! CorNouws Thanks, Louis, Pleasure to be here! sophi ok CorNouws: welcome and good evening CorNouws Thanks, André, for the suggestion ;-) louis_to Cor, in case you do not know.... CorNouws Thanks, Sophie, for your support, louis_to mhu: Matthias Huetsch * Thalion72 is accepting the thanks before Cor changes his mind CorNouws :-))) louis_to _Nesshof_: Martin Hollmichel CorNouws OK, the rest of the names i know. louis_to right louis_to so, the agenda is on the wiki: louis_to http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/The_OpenOffice.org_Community_Council_Agenda mhu Hi all; welcome Cor. CorNouws Hi Matthias paveljanik Hi louis_to The last meeting was 06 Dec. Minutes, AIs, etc.: louis_to http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council_Minutes#2007-12-06 CorNouws Hi Pavel. Sorry I forgot to say hello to you. louis_to please review them.... Thalion72 i have no additions paveljanik CorNouws: ;-) louis_to I move to approve last meeting's minutes. All in favour? (note formal process) louis_to +1 Thalion72 +1 paveljanik +1 mhu +1 CorNouws (no comment) sophi +1 jpmcc (no comment) _Nesshof_ +1 louis_to minutes approved louis_to Items for this week continue from last time louis_to sophi: any news on the next AB meeting? sophi louis_to: no every body seems in holliday at its turn, so no news till the end of the month CorNouws I have read 17-12 was planned, was it posphoned? Thalion72 do we know a date for the next AB meeting? Thalion72 CorNouws: yes sophi no, not now, at the end of january I think louis_to okay. I'd urge us all to read the minutes of the AB meeting. CorNouws done, of course. louis_to please consider discusisng items of concern next CC meeting *** stx12 (i=stx12@p548E5CA8.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined the channel paveljanik yes, for sure. louis_to eg, license * stx12 wishes happy new year louis_to hi stx12 paveljanik Hi Stefan! Thalion72 hi stx12 .. to you too sophi hi Stefan, thanks and same for you mhu Hi stx12 CorNouws Hi Stephan, the best wishes for 2OOo8 Thalion72 louis_to: maybe we should discuss, what we as a community ecpect from the AB louis_to now or next time? * louis_to suggests next time Thalion72 e.g. I've completely missed points, what the AB is going to help the community sophi as soon as I've a new date for the AB meeting, I'll post it louis_to I agree with Andre louis_to and would propose: Thalion72 louis_to: next time .. we may prepare this on mailing lists louis_to (yes) louis_to we ask the community what it expects and wants from the AB sophi Thalion72: I can enlight what have been discussed on the CC list by the end of the week louis_to with a range that can be deduced from the minutes sophi sent CorNouws Aren't AB members part of the community? (discussion already started ;-) ) louis_to CorNouws: debatable point CorNouws Ok, w?l do that on the list or so Thalion72 CorNouws: moire or less but I have e.g. no idea, what the current contributions of Canonical and Google are jpmcc Thalion72: or IBM CorNouws The fact alone that 2 of the 3 are know as suporters is an important contribution. * sophi hopes you know her ;) CorNouws allthough the project cannot thrive from such contributions alone, of course louis_to so: who wants to own this AI? * louis_to suggests Andre CorNouws AI - agenda item? louis_to yes. louis_to action item, actually Thalion72 ok ok... CorNouws or shre it, André Thalion72 I'll take this louis_to thanks; louis_to CorNouws: I have learned from the master that better to have a slingle owner for any action item Thalion72 CorNouws: I'd be happy to share (we can discuss this later) louis_to http://professionalsuperhero.com/ CorNouws One owner, one supporter. OK for me (sorry for typoooos) louis_to on to next item.... louis_to sophi: would you have more updates on the certication process? sophi louis_to: not much more than what I'v wrote to the list, work in progress louis_to http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=1349 louis_to Okay, some questions, then.... louis_to are we ready to work with ECDL? sophi louis_to: no, not yet, we are not finishet with the syllabus louis_to okay. louis_to should we move ahead with funding a contributor to work on this? sophi louis_to: yes, this is what we have said, so we should do it :) louis_to do you or the team have anyone in mind? sophi louis_to: Franz Jacob and Leif Lodal have work hard on that sophi louis_to: Franz have written all and is maintaining the documents CorNouws can I ask a related question? sophi CorNouws: of course :) Thalion72 ok, sophie -can you write a breif proposal, what the fund would be used for? sophi Thalion72: ok CorNouws when we have the criteria, is the accreditation pickud up automatically? how does that work? sophi CorNouws: it's a bit long to explain here, may be I'll sum up the process on the CC list CorNouws Ok, maybe there? omething in the archive alraedy, that you can point to louis_to sophi: thanks louis_to CorNouws: I don't think so.... CorNouws well, in that case thanks for the info to come! sophi louis_to: we can find most of the process on the certification list louis_to AI: sophie to write up a proposal for how the funding of a contributor would work and what it would produce... sophi louis_to: ok louis_to sophi: ah, good. certification@documentation.openoffice.org < i think louis_to shall we move on then to the next item? sophi louis_to: yes, between Evan and me, the sum up is done, but I'll post on the CC list louis_to sophi: thanks! louis_to next item.... louis_to I had suggested adding nonvoting members to the CC discussions jpmcc for exmaaple? louis_to at present, we only exceptionally allow non CC members to post to the list and do not allow them to attend the IRC meetings. I would like to modify the rule stx12 hm, how would we benefit from that? louis_to jpmcc: example would be, say, to allow people from the AB to particiipate in discussions but not vote mhu what do you intend with this addition? louis_to stx12; hm. assuming we benefit from anything, I would imagine we could bring in more of the stakeholder interest this way and also engage them in our interests more efficaciously louis_to mhu: to include more stakeholder discussions. stx12 i can imagine that we follow jpmcc's suggestion to present proposals and that a CC member invites a non-voting member to present; but permanemt participation... louis_to example: the ESC has nonvoting members, I believe * Thalion72 agrees to stx12 jpmcc I would have no issue if the AB wanted to nominate one observer / liaison member to the CC louis_to jpmcc: you mean, besides sophi? mhu louis_to: the ESC has guest members, intention is to promote them to full members after some time jpmcc The CC has one member on the AB (sophi), maybe the AB should have one member on the CC sophi for my opinion it's too early, the AB has to find his place and define itself first mhu sophi: yes, absolutely Thalion72 sophi: you may ask this at the next AB meeting sophi after the second meeting, if there has been some work done, we will discuss it jpmcc I think to get the AB to agree on a single rep would be a test of its effectivenes and maturity louis_to uhm, it's only had one meeting, john :-) jpmcc Yes, but look at the collective salary of the people there :) Thalion72 anway .. I'm open to the idea of non-voting / presenting "guests" at Council meetings (asl long as anybody from the community could present here) louis_to I'm open to Thalion72's and stx12's modulation sophi Thalion72: yes I agree also with this idea jpmcc louis_to: can you play it back as a proposal? louis_to yes... louis_to To allow nonvoting participation in discussions by exponents of proposals or those implicated louis_to is that fair? mhu sounds good sophi louis_to: yes jpmcc yes, not sure it's English ;-) stx12 hm, sounds complicated to me * louis_to aside to jpmcc: it's not, really, but telegraphs the message louis_to stx12: how so? stx12 non-voting members may participate on invitation to present on proposals. jpmcc "CC members may request that non-members attend meetings on a non-voting basis where they have particular expertise to contribute, subject to the apporval of the chair" paveljanik chair? jpmcc LS-P mhu jmpcc: good, and even English :-) *** CorNouw1 (n=cono@a80-100-71-226.adsl.xs4all.nl) has joined the channel CorNouw1 seems I was out of connction, some time... jpmcc Cor suffers from split personality _Nesshof_ louis_to: where do you want to add this statement ? in the charter ? Thalion72 no .. why should we? stx12 in the unwritten bylaws :-) mhu yes, bylaws. louis_to Ithink it would have to be where we specify it _Nesshof_ stx12: just want to ask for written bylaws louis_to I mean where we specify the current rule jpmcc Yes, I propose we note this on the CC page on the website *** sophi has quit IRC (Excess Flood) louis_to the current rule may be in the charter; I forget. if it is, then we must amend it as normal stx12 website is fine with me; but let's stick with consensus for the veto against participation of a non-voting member (instewad of chair). louis_to hm. we lost sophie.... louis_to stx12: +1 *** sophi (n=sophie@m168.net81-64-15.noos.fr) has joined the channel Thalion72 moment .. what is a "consensus for the veto against participation ..."? louis_to so, AI: LSP to a) determine where the current rule is stated and also to add to the website for Council the provisions that john wrote up, modulo ST's comment that vetoing a presence should not be up to the chair but determined by a consensus of the council members. louis_to Thalion72: I think I answered your query Thalion72 hmm .. if one council meber needs to propose the participation we will never reach a consensus veto jpmcc "CC members may request that non-members attend a meeting on a non-voting basis where they have particular expertise to contribute. Requests may be turned down by a majority vote of members." Thalion72 jpmcc: yes - this would work stx12 a CC member can invite a non-voting member; by default that's ok - unless there is a consensus between the other members to veto. mhu john, but we don't have majority votes. *** CorNouws has quit IRC (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) Thalion72 and we cannot reach real consensus Thalion72 so .. anyway I'm fine with the consensus (at least, as long as I suggest someone for participation ;) ) louis_to Thalion72: no evidence we cannot reach consensus. We usually do.... CorNouw1 My IRC prog is bugging me, but ... jpmcc "CC members may request that non-members attend a meeting on a non-voting basis where they have particular expertise to contribute. Requests can be rejected if a majority of CC members object". CorNouw1 the agenda states 'adding nonvoting members' _Nesshof_ mhu: I think we can have mojority votes for items described in the bylaws CorNouw1 thus I have to read that': allowing them to attend one meeting' ? mhu yes, but I do favour consensus votes over majority votes Thalion72 CorNouw1: the current discussion is about guests for one meeting - yes stx12 _Nesshof_: but we shouldn't; we should stick to operate on consensus louis_to CorNouw1: I thnk we agreed on the latest wording, but I would actually urge consensus. I don't think majority voting is good here Thalion72 let'S stick with consensus .. even if we will never reach it jpmcc let's vote on that;-) CorNouw1 consensus is ok for me for sure * _Nesshof_ think that for internal procedures majority votes are considerable, but also have no problem with consensus voting Thalion72 CorNouw1: the problem I see is, we agrred that one Council Members needs to suggest a guest - but it needs consensus to deny ths proposal louis_to so, reframed from above, AI.. LSP using "consensus." Thalion72 this would mean, the proposing council members need to agree to deny louis_to shall we continue? Thalion72 yes - please sophi yes CorNouw1 ok mhu yes jpmcc + louis_to trademark: louis_to the discussion (nonexistent) is on trademark@council.openoffice.org louis_to the points are: louis_to * use Mozilla's trademark policy, written to apply to OOo louis_to ie, only OOo from the OOo repository is officially OOo (redistribution is okay) louis_to additions, enhancements, substractions, are "based on OpenOffice.org code" louis_to that is one part Thalion72 this should really be disussed at large on the lists before we vote louis_to right, we cannot vote on it now. I am merely giving update Thalion72 esp. wehn we are going to use Mozilla'S tm policy louis_to yes. Thalion72 and are going to defend it in the same way louis_to so, discussion is on trademark@council louis_to I have really dragged on this Thalion72 hmm? louis_to I have been lazy; mea culpa. But also the issue is that until fairly recently our stakeholders were not exactly seeing eye to eye Thalion72 sorry, I cannot remember many posts about a clear policy at this list louis_to there have not been many, aka, none Thalion72 can we please think more about what the community wants and needs on this issue? louis_to so, shall we table this until discussions on trademark@ have matured? sophi louis_to: yes louis_to Thalion72: that is what we are talking about sophi louis_to: we should first formulate it on the list then present it to the community CorNouw1 Question: Is defending the tm the same issue as using one official OOo repository? mhu louis_to: we need at least a proposal to think about and then discuss louis_to sophi: yes Thalion72 If we only think about stakejolders, we will easily end up in a situation, where we sue John Haller and our own community members for Building OOo Portable louis_to mhu yes, that's why I asked to table this until discusison has matured louis_to Thalion72: of course. mhu louis_to: I simply wanted to agree :-) *** stx12 has quit IRC (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) louis_to so, on to next item? Thalion72 do we have an AI defined? jpmcc could we set ourselves a target date for the trademark policy? *** stx12 (i=stx12@p548E5CA8.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined the channel louis_to it's the old one: establish a trademark policy louis_to jpmcc: I'd be happy to go with that sophi louis_to: the new one is based on Mozilla ;) louis_to say, two weeks? That would be for initial proposal that can be discussed by the community jpmcc +1 Thalion72 +1 sophi +1 CorNouw1 first on trademark@council ? _Nesshof_ +1 sophi CorNouw1: yes Thalion72 yes CorNouw1 +1 * stx12 needs help what we are voting on louis_to CorNouw1: yes. you may join CorNouw1 pls, thanks louis_to stx12: deadline for initial trademark policy to be subsequently discused by community; discussions for proposal creation on trademark@council mhu +1 Thalion72 louis_to: can you please add Mark Moeller (if hi is not yet on the tm list) louis_to sure Thalion72 (he knows the problems of Portable apps and Mozillas TM-policy quite well) louis_to indeed.... stx12 I'm happy to vote vote on deadlines for other people's AIs stx12 who owns this? Thalion72 louis? CorNouw1 that's what I thought when voting +1 mhu louis_to: [side note: sorry, but the hour is over, and I want to leave; can we come to an end for today?] louis_to Louis owns it louis_to mnu: one hour is too short but let's see if we can end this for today CorNouw1 budget ?! louis_to are all in favour of adjourning for today? Thalion72 looking at the agenda - do we need urgendly vote about something? louis_to CorNouw1: we can discuss budget on the list; might be better there, anyway Thalion72 louis_to: what's about Fosdem budget? CorNouw1 OK for me. louis_to Thalion72: there are no specifics to it yet mhu louis_to: if one hour is too short, we need to start earlier (UTC wise). louis_to I asked on conference@ for the committee to form. But we have no specficifs as to who will be going besides the committee Thalion72 well.. Eric B. asked for funds .. and costs will raise if booket to late louis_to Eric B asked for funds before the committee had been formed louis_to but I am sure that he and other presenters will be funded louis_to I am ware of the cost issue. CorNouw1 about ending this meeting: what does 'account of AB meeting' means? jpmcc Can we agreed to fund EB now (and maybe save money?) louis_to I would suggest that we can assure the committee members of funding louis_to shall we vote on that? jpmcc What's the total exposure (roughly)? louis_to Proposal: to fund fosdem committee members and early participants of travel and lodging sophi +1 Thalion72 EB's estimation was about 300EUR louis_to for EB, about 300-400 eur louis_to I would rather do this, however: jpmcc So 300-400 per person for how many people? Thalion72 commitee is 3 people afaik louis_to jpmcc for the comittee it's just three louis_to plus me louis_to dieter, juergen, eric louis_to diter and juergen are sunnies; as am I louis_to so, just eric for no louis_to now, I mean sophi but may be others will attend ? no ? CorNouw1 so that? about 35% of the 2008 budget? louis_to yes, but this is just for funding for the committee mhu so, only eric is requesting funding (others are funded by Sun, I assume) ? louis_to eric requested funding early--before we had formed the committee to evaluate who will even be going sophi If one other community member want to attend, he won't be funded? louis_to sophi: no. the propsoal is for *early* louis_to requests. Thalion72 ok .. so I would suggest we vote for EB .. and ask the committe to come up with a budget for other spendings louis_to I would rather set aside a lot more money for all funding requests louis_to Thalion72: +1 sophi but this was proposed ont the lead list, what if other developers want to participate? louis_to we should allow them to, if possible. jpmcc I propose we authorise refund of Eric's expenses to a max of 400 Euro. If any others come along later we can vote on them at a later meeting. louis_to we have two days at fosdem Thalion72 jpmcc: +1 louis_to I'd guess max 10 people may participate, and some of those will be sun mhu jmpcc: yes, sounds acceptable stx12 louis_to: i wouldn't assume that sunnies are funded by default louis_to jpmcc: i'd suggest we ask the fosdem committe to supply us a budget louis_to stx12: good point paveljanik stx12: funded by...? sophi ok for me, but let some others to be funded too paveljanik by Sun? stx12 louis_to: i wouldn't assume that sunnies are funded by default by sun paveljanik or by "us"? louis_to my guess is that we will be talking about 2000 eu. Thalion72 stx12: so they should request funds from other sources early ;) paveljanik hmm, I'd like to see some result of the committee first. Who and how many people will go there. jpmcc Eric has acted promptly and got his funding request in early. We should reward enthusiasm and forward planning. Thalion72 sorry, but I see no reason to delay one request, just because we are not aware of other requests yet paveljanik I do not want to vote about EB's spendings if we do not know if he is selected to be there. louis_to eric will be there, I have no doubt; he is also on the committee louis_to I have no doubt he will be there as there has not been that enthusiastic a response Thalion72 paveljanik: so.. we can make clear tha money will nly be spend, if he presents at FOSDEM Thalion72 (I never thought about this, as this is obvious to me) sophi louis_to: some dev from my company would like to participate, but nothing has come public yet paveljanik Thalion72: well, hmm. I'd like our project to be represented there. I do not want our project ot be there (only). louis_to please make it public. I asked on the project leads list to publicize it among your communities... louis_to thanks paveljanik and I'm not very satisfied with Eric's skills to represent our project. Unfortunately. paveljanik I'd like to see more developers there. louis_to paveljanik: more than eric will be there sophi louis_to: ok, so I let the commitee knows about them, they are already known in the OOo community paveljanik as this is for developers. Thalion72 well .. so we can vote anyway louis_to erici is but one. thorsten, Dieter will be there; Juergen too, I am sure louis_to but this is uncertain b/c the committee has yet to go over submissions paveljanik did they requested funding as well? louis_to paveljanik: no louis_to or at least not yet. holidays really affected timing paveljanik so we can only vote about EB now. If at all. louis_to paveljanik: prcisely louis_to I would like to call a vote on the proposal raised paveljanik so, my vote is +1 for covering travel and lodging for EB if we (the formed committee) can't find better candidates. Thalion72 ok: as this has been on the agenda for long, I also call for a vote louis_to paveljanik: hm. that is a little offensive sophi +1 paveljanik offensive? Sorry? louis_to and I dont' think we can vote on that paveljanik how offensive? paveljanik I do not understand. stx12 paveljanik: with this restriction one (EB) can't make the preparations Thalion72 "the formed committe" is the FOSDEM commitee? paveljanik Thalion72: yes. louis_to "if we cannot find better candidates"? louis_to I would urge a vote as john put it: louis_to limit to 400 euros to present at fosdem Thalion72 so it is up to the FOSDEM committe (where EB is member) to send EB to Fosdem or not? stx12 out of the markting budget paveljanik Thalion72: yes. louis_to and to urge the fosdem committee to come up with a budget for travel/lodging paveljanik out of marketing? ;-) +10 ;-) louis_to Thalion72: yes Thalion72 so I have no problem with pavel's wording * stx12 is following _Nesshof_'s proposal paveljanik Thalion72: if the fosdem committee (where EB is a member) will realise that we as a project can send 10 core OOo devs there, ... louis_to which is? paveljanik people who can answer questions? paveljanik ;-) louis_to how is this different form 400 eu. for prsenting? louis_to not just for being on the committee? paveljanik ? jpmcc I'm losing the plot (and the will to live :-). I propose: "This meeting authorises the refund of Eric's expenses to a max of 400 Euro to enable him to present a paper on OOo at FOSDEM." mhu does this discussion lead us anywhere? louis_to jpmcc: i think the trend is to have it iff and only if paveljanik ... if fosdem committee will select his proposed paper. paveljanik ok? louis_to mhu: yes, a vote on allocating funds louis_to paveljanik: yes Thalion72 paveljanik: this is exactly what Eric requested btw. paveljanik Thalion72: :-) paveljanik then +1. Thalion72 Eric Bachard asked for funding (in case his presentation is accepted). Thalion72 (quote from agenda) paveljanik accepted by fosdem or by committee? Thalion72 ok .. vote on jpmccs wording: +1 CorNouw1 +1 louis_to +1 on proopasl modulo acceptance of paper (or whatever is presented) * stx12 would agree for the sake of shorten the meeting; but... stx12 so, do we (CC) grant the funds to EB or to the committee? * sophi has already voted +1 * Thalion72 loves consensus voting :) Thalion72 to Eric paveljanik because he asked for funding. Thalion72 maybe we shouold have asked *not* to fund Eric paveljanik that's clear. paveljanik and terrible at the same time. * mhu would refund EB's expenses, but not allocate a fund (that's what Martin is preparing) * stx12 thinks we should reorder the agenda next time paveljanik :-( Thalion72 one -1 vote was enough to approve the funds paveljanik Thalion72: ? paveljanik -1? approve? louis_to stx12: I agree. last time I tried reordering the agenda, it didn't go over well louis_to however, this is going on.... jpmcc ...and on... louis_to all, have we voted on this item? stx12 then it woul dbe clear who is in charge of marketing funds louis_to stx12, _Nesshof_? * mhu asked to come to an end 30min ago ... Thalion72 mhu: yes ... but you know - conensus voting _Nesshof_ stx12: that will make live more easy louis_to if we cannot agree, then please lt us continue this on the list and set a deadline: louis_to Friday Thalion72 louis_to: this is nonsense .. sorry louis_to but I would urge us to consider calling this meeting to a close Thalion72 ant state that we cannot reach consensus jpmcc Has anyone voted -1 ? louis_to by my tally we do have a consensus of +1s and no -1s paveljanik no louis_to but not all have voted. stx12 +1 _Nesshof_ I would vote if there is a promise that we are going to approve the budget and will never these endless discussion again _Nesshof_ +1 louis_to _Nesshof_ we can also use the list CorNouw1 +1 mhu +1 (and agreeing to Martin's comments) louis_to and this discssion has not been endless, btw: it just ended. And we spent only 25 minutes o nit stx12 can we please have the topic budget on the upper half of next meeting's agenda louis_to yes. louis_to and we can also use the list. mhu and we're only 35min over time :-( Thalion72 yes Thalion72 (yes - using the list) louis_to mhu: there is no statement that the meeting is 1 hour. historically, we do 1.5 hours and I anticiapted that this time louis_to so, we are all tired of this and I call this meeting to end. jpmcc +1 Thalion72 ok sophi louis_to: ok louis_to AI for funding Eric's trip to fosdem: ST? mhu louis_to: but not at this time of day (night in western europe) CorNouw1 about ending this meeting: what does 'account of AB meeting' means? louis_to CorNouw1: a report as we had it from Sophie of the Advidosry Board meeting CorNouw1 OK, so can wait louis_to CorNouw1: we had it stx12 i think this should be an AI of a committee member; louis_to stx12: but I have no part in Team; Does Dieter? sophi CorNouw1: I've already done it, I will make an update on the list stx12 the money transfer - if appropriate - is the smallest part. Thalion72 and what input we got from AB .. and will give to the AB louis_to stx12: ah. mhu all, I'm now leaving; good night. jpmcc Here's some bedtime reading for those who have kids: http://www.stayathomeserver.com/book.aspx louis_to okay, will take it stx12 i think this should be an AI of a FOSDEM committee member; paveljanik good night Thalion72 cu mhu louis_to bye mnu louis_to mhu sophi good night louis_to meeting adjoruned, good night all </pre> --- Meeting adjourns, 21:40

Return to Community Council Minutes 20080109.