Difference between revisions of "Community Council Log 20090409"

Latest revision as of 16:40, 14 December 2009

IRC Log of Community Council Meeting 2009-04-09

Attendees

• Sophie Gautier (sophi)
• Martin Hollmichel (_Nesshof_)
• Matthias Huetsch (mhu)
• Cor Nouws (CorNouws)
• André Schnabel (Thalion72)
• Stefan Taxhet (stx12)
• Pavel Janik (paveljanik) (came on scene at end)
• Louis Suárez-Potts (louis_to)

irc.freenode.net #OOocouncil 14:29:47 4/9/09

14:29:47 *** You have joined the channel


Session commences

14:36:52 louis_to agenda is here:

14:36:54 louis_to http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Agenda

14:37:13 louis_to The minutes (thanks!) are listed there

14:37:24 louis_to do we agree with last week's?

14:38:05 CorNouws I see no minutes .. and besides that: The agenda has another order ...

14:38:13 louis_to ?

14:38:37 louis_to ah. I am going to the action items as relevant minutes; do we agree with those AIs?

14:38:37 CorNouws http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Minutes#Minutes

14:38:55 CorNouws http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Agenda#Next_regular_meeting:_April_9th_2009

14:39:16 louis_to Cor: do you want to work with the order established by the agenda? that contravenes normal procedure, to approve history first, then proceed on to new things

14:39:48 CorNouws Yes pls as on the wiki - we talked about that 2 wks agoo - noreason for me to do it differten now..

14:39:57 Thalion72 louis_to: Cor is right, we agreed last time to put Rafaella's requeston top

14:39:58 louis_to very well

14:40:01 louis_to no problem

14:40:08 CorNouws thanks ;-)

14:40:14 louis_to so:

14:40:15 louis_to L10n builds distribution over the network, see Rafaella mail

14:40:15 louis_to 1. what can we do to support

14:40:15 louis_to 2. ..

14:40:15 sophi thanks :)

14:40:23 Thalion72 CorNouws: and sorry for changing the order today ;)

14:40:35 louis_to her mail is: http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=2000

14:40:51 louis_to key point:

14:40:51 louis_to The idea:

14:40:51 louis_to - appoint a council coordinator every 4 to 5 months, who is

14:40:51 louis_to responsible during that time for poking the colleagues ;-) etc.

14:40:51 louis_to Expected:

14:40:51 louis_to - will improve overall cc-performance

14:40:51 louis_to - will help to share the feeling of really being part of

14:40:51 louis_to it, of joined responsibility

14:40:57 sophi Thalion72: my fault, I promized and didn't managed

14:40:57 CorNouws Thalion72: (OK, thought it was because of wiki's numberng behaviour ??)

14:41:24 Thalion72 louis_to: oops .. you mixed upt the topics

14:41:25 louis_to oops sorry, wrong url

14:41:27 louis_to yesp

14:41:38 louis_to http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=discuss&msgNo=1986

14:41:52 louis_to curses cut and paste and multitasking

14:42:22 louis_to RB : I

14:42:22 louis_to want to make sure that all native-language community actively localizing

14:42:22 louis_to the product are able to follow this process and do not have to find

14:42:22 louis_to workarounds because of an issue with the OOo distribution infrastructure.

14:43:12 sophi we miss space to upload all the languages and language packs

14:43:23 louis_to questions: what sort of infrastructure is she speaking of? is it just storage space?

14:43:39 Thalion72 maybe stx12 can tell more?

14:43:46 CorNouws And IMO also reliability ..

14:44:09 sophi yes, see : It seems that the space is not sufficient to distribute such a large number of languages. I am - of course - not talking about language packs but of bull binaries.

14:44:16 CorNouws Both André and others had trouble with data loss because of hardware probs ..

14:44:51 Thalion72 CorNouws: hmm ... that was an issue at the pootle server and we got information that this has been resolved

14:44:57 sophi and we plane to may be change the criteria to have binaries for more languages

14:44:59 stx12 CorNouws, you are talking about pootle. rafaella talks about distribution of binaries

14:45:14 Thalion72 The current problem is about bulding and distributing localized test versions (RCs)

14:45:43 stx12 i think the requirements rafaella describes are easy to agree with. together with the constraints of the network this means a bit of discipline and structure.

14:45:46 CorNouws stx12: Thalion72: Sorry for mixing up, for me thos ere both l10n-support issues ;-)

14:46:15 CorNouws Thalion72: has been resolved = repaired .. but is it redundant, will data be save with a possible next crash??

14:46:21 stx12 disk space, mirror capacity and bandwidth is limited even nowadays.

14:47:04 sophi stx12: so how is it possible to have more space, mirror capacity and bandwith?

14:47:08 Thalion72 stx12: but if i get you right, we have enough resource but need to use them more efficiently?

14:47:29 CorNouws stx12: I remeber some council member complaining about low spending :-)

14:47:44 stx12 Thalion72: that's half of the truth

14:48:11 Thalion72 and the other half ...? ;)

14:48:14 CorNouws all: Is it necessary to work out all detaisl here, or can we say that 2, e of us sort it out next 2 wkes?

14:48:21 mhu now has finished his dinner; sorry it took some time

14:48:27 sophi if we decide to build more binaries for languages but are not able to distribute them, the discussion is dead before begining

14:48:42 stx12 use main set (~30gb), extended set (~150Gb) well and have some more space for low request data.

14:48:56 CorNouws (repeat): all: Is it necessary to work out all detailsl here, or can we say that 2, 3 of us sort it out next 2 wkes?

14:49:17 stx12 sophi: that's correct - but I was surprised by rafaella "was told...".

14:50:10 stx12 CorNouws: that's a good approach; i think we agreed earlier that we will drive things and are happy about reviewing proposals.

14:50:15 sophi stx12: the discussion was on mirror list if I remember well, some languages are available on extended and orther on stable if I'm right, where every body would like to be visible at the same level

14:50:55 Thalion72 stx12: well .. just this week we had the request from serbian team to have full installation sets of RC1

14:51:12 Thalion72 this request was denied due to lack of ressources

14:51:33 CorNouws Thalion72: resources to build or to store?

14:51:49 Thalion72 CorNouws: I don't know (seemed to me both)

14:52:00 sophi Thalion72: yes, and we should discuss the necessary % of translation being sure that the distribution can be done

14:52:03 stx12 Thalion72: which is unfortunate and not necessary. i don't think they asked for 5 platforms?

14:52:06 Thalion72 I would have to review the mails (did not follow this closely)

14:52:19 sophi stx12: for 3 plateforms

14:52:59 sophi CorNouws: they are providing a mirror, so they have even resources to store

14:53:04 stx12 sophi: ok, then i don't see the specific problem. but it's correct to rethink the distribution structure.

14:53:36 sophi stx12: ok, thanks, we can discuss this on the list

14:53:45 stx12 on which list?

14:53:52 stx12 and who is we?

14:54:21 sophi stx12: we is rafaella and l10n team, the list could be dev@l10n

14:54:22 stx12 is not a fried of passive voice like "was told that there is no space" ;-)

14:54:40 Thalion72 stx12: but this is the case

14:54:58 stx12 there are those missing that upload build and manage the master(s)

14:55:00 sophi stx12: discussing together on the list should clarify the request and the needs :)

14:55:24 louis_to I would suggest then that we finalize discussions on the list .

14:55:44 Thalion72 and first identify the actual problem

14:55:51 _Nesshof_ wonders if it is more important to distribute more languages or without and with jre build ...

14:56:05 sophi stx12: I'll send you the links to the previous discussion I remember

14:56:09 CorNouws are technical people and HR people present on that list as well??

14:56:14 stx12 or 3-5 linux builds

14:56:17 _Nesshof_ suggest to drop the without jre builds

14:56:45 stx12 CorNouws: HR? Heiner or RE = release engineering?

14:56:55 CorNouws _Nesshof_: poll the users@ list about that ;-)

14:57:17 stx12 i guess we would need joost, florian and marcus

14:57:18 CorNouws HR = human resources; i.e. do we have people to do the work

14:57:42 stx12 we have people who claim they can't do the work ;-)

14:57:46 Thalion72 marcus is at dev@l10n .. joost and florian not

14:58:41 Thalion72 I can ask Florian to join the list for a while (but he is very busy at the moment)

14:59:18 stx12 or we go the easy approach and rent a box with 1TB disk space and let joost/marcus upload everything they have...

14:59:40 sophi Thalion72: I think we should clear the exact request about space needed and what languages are available (what % of translations is needed) first on l10n then discuss with distribution

14:59:46 Thalion72 if someone checks the price .. no problem

15:00:43 stx12 and here we come to the proposal again...

15:00:44 CorNouws 1TB space, and is distribution no problem?

15:01:00 _Nesshof_ Thalion72: do we know what bandwidth we need for tht box ?

15:01:11 mhu wonders if we could consult download statistics to measure which builds could be dropped ...

15:01:24 CorNouws ... that we have seen the necessary questions here and that x + y are going to sort it out ..

15:01:35 _Nesshof_ mhu: this is not really an option

15:01:50 _Nesshof_ this would be a mainenance nightmare

15:02:00 mhu ??? you proposed to drop w/o jre builds ???

15:02:06 Thalion72 CorNouws: I could work on this in the next week (at least try to collect the requirements)

15:02:17 sophi _Nesshof_: available builds are depending on the space available, we have more builds so more space needed :)

15:02:35 stx12 i think we will need some tooling support anyway (qatrack, pootle/translation stats, ...)

15:02:47 _Nesshof_ mhu: what i don't want to see is, we don't need lang x on platform y

15:03:07 sophi stx12: yes, in fact distribution do not follow the l10n growth

15:03:10 mhu no, I also dont want that

15:03:14 _Nesshof_ for jre I can say from bouncer data: 75% of downloads are wjre downloads

15:03:36 _Nesshof_ but this is also language dependent

15:03:36 Thalion72 _Nesshof_: because thi is the default choice ;)

15:03:39 mhu so, you have already answered my question :-)

15:03:50 stx12 @_Nesshof_: and i don't want 5 linux versions for a language used by 10 people distributed to 100 mirrors

15:04:04 _Nesshof_ some l10n communities seems to prefer to promote without jre other have no problem with jre

15:04:11 Thalion72 stx12: we really need to identify the requirements first

15:04:27 louis_to stx12: we had previously (or I had) raised the idea of regional availability only for some languages

15:04:29 Thalion72 the request was about versions for testing - not final distribution

15:04:36 _Nesshof_ stx12: that a catch22

15:04:37 sophi _Nesshof_: so let ask the l10n team, they made the version they need available for distribution by Joost

15:04:57 sophi _Nesshof_: we provide the exact links to the versions

15:05:09 stx12 so, do we need 2 linux packages per language for testing ?

15:05:10 _Nesshof_ sophi: no, i don't want a language dependent table

15:05:25 sophi _Nesshof_: this is what is done already

irc.freenode.net #OOocouncil 15:05:36 4/9/09

15:05:36 *** You have joined the channel

15:06:16 _Nesshof_ sophi: language requested should mean that we deliver this language for all platforms

15:06:30 Thalion72 stx12: I don'T think we are able to identify the requierements here in this discussion

15:06:33 stx12 @_Nesshof_: no, i'm not saying that i don't want to distribute builds for a language.

15:06:48 stx12 @_Nesshof_: and this is where we disagree and what is not feasible

15:07:06 _Nesshof_ stx12: but what ?

15:08:10 sophi could we have the discussion first with l10n teams and see what is needed before stating what is possible or not?

15:08:12 stx12 but provide 1 build per platform for testing; rc's on demand

15:08:23 stx12 but provide 1 build per platform per langauge for testing; rc's on demand

15:08:31 Thalion72 stx12: simple answer: we need all the builds

15:09:00 stx12 Thalion72: you and ~10 other team - but not 120

15:09:06 Thalion72 we indeed can debate this for another two hours here ..but I'd rather discuss this in anoher round

15:09:08 louis_to Thalion72: but we do not need all the builds everywhere--?

15:09:13 stx12 Thalion72: and no - not even de, fr, ...

15:09:35 Thalion72 stx12: I disacree ;)

15:09:39 _Nesshof_ stx12: there I disagree

15:10:29 louis_to Given that we have limited time, I suggest we a) establish the prcise problem, b) some solutions, besides just more servers and c) reviisit this to conclude next meeting

15:10:48 louis_to and that we do this onlist.

15:10:53 Thalion72 louis_to: +1

15:11:09 Thalion72 leaves the question "Who on what list"

15:11:20 CorNouws Who takes care that all people that need to be involved really are present?

15:11:28 louis_to I would think here l10n

15:11:37 louis_to and I would suggest sophi

15:11:52 sophi louis_to: ok :)

15:11:55 Thalion72 I can help with this

15:11:58 CorNouws +1

15:12:01 louis_to it seems to me that _Nesshof_ and stx12 would have to be involved, Thalion72, too :-)

15:12:15 louis_to thanks, sophi

15:12:19 louis_to thanks Thalion72

15:13:11 Thalion72 plus Joost, Florian, HR

15:14:00 Thalion72 next Agenda item?

15:14:30 sophi 2. Growing the project

15:14:58 louis_to AI, Sophie and Andre, with Joost, Florian, HR, possibly Stefan T. and Martin H. to address l10n sever issue on l10n list, present to CC for discussion next meeting (add to agenda) recommendations

15:15:05 louis_to yes, next item on agena

15:15:38 CorNouws Remeber not to forget reliabillity

15:15:57 louis_to ?

15:16:12 louis_to CorNouws: I am not sure what you mean

15:16:25 CorNouws louis_to: (20:46:19) CorNouws

15:16:35 louis_to Item 2: Growing the project, as sophi stated: Growing the project

15:16:35 louis_to 1. see mail list

15:16:35 louis_to 2. discussion

15:16:35 louis_to 3. to go or not to go

15:17:12 louis_to See (this time): http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=2000

15:18:27 sophi CorNouws: do I understand well that you need detail pages linked to the items on what is needed and proposed to further the project?

15:18:55 CorNouws sophi: as detail in working out, yes

15:19:08 CorNouws but that is probably a next step

15:19:33 mhu louis_to: the link above is "cc coordinator" but not "growing the project ?

15:19:44 sophi CorNouws: ok, thanks

15:19:58 CorNouws what do people find of the idea?

15:20:13 CorNouws mhu: Yes, Louis already said he needs a course ;-)

15:20:26 CorNouws it is #1999

15:20:32 _Nesshof_ CorNouws: I'm not sure if I really got the idea

15:20:40 mhu I think, it is a good idea

15:20:56 louis_to was just oince again making a mistake.

15:20:57 louis_to sigh

15:21:07 louis_to http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=1999

15:21:18 louis_to (am in another meeting, alas)

15:21:19 stx12 and it links to

15:21:20 stx12 http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Project_Improvements

15:21:29 _Nesshof_ CorNouws: all points are valid, but what is expected who is doing what ?

15:22:09 _Nesshof_ which of the items should have which importance ?

15:22:28 CorNouws _Nesshof_: good point ... But you understand the idea now? Or do you think that I want us to apoint people to do all the work?

15:22:38 sophi _Nesshof_: this why I think that some details are requested to give some priorities

15:22:38 _Nesshof_ how do we see these items in comparsion to bugfixes/feature for the product ?

15:23:04 CorNouws _Nesshof_: You are thinking about priority, fixing?

15:23:20 CorNouws I see it more (now) as making items visible to all

15:23:23 mhu it is about the project not the product, I think I understood

15:24:04 sophi CorNouws: who is 'all'?

15:24:51 CorNouws the whole global (OOo) community

15:25:37 _Nesshof_ sophi: to leverage most of the items on the list we would need development resources, so we need to make clear how we see the priority of these items in comparsion to bug fixes or new features

15:25:48 _Nesshof_ at least this applies to patch handling

15:26:01 _Nesshof_ further improvement for support developes

15:26:08 _Nesshof_ localization process

15:26:39 sophi _Nesshof_: yes, I agree and you can add marketing tasks too

15:26:52 _Nesshof_ sophi: yes

15:27:23 CorNouws _Nesshof_: sophi: when it comes to prioritizing

15:27:28 CorNouws and decissions

15:27:35 sophi CorNouws: so you want the community to add items on furthering the community first, before entering the details?

15:27:41 CorNouws there may be a moment that the CC is going to discuss it

15:27:55 CorNouws but before we know what we have to discuss, we must see it

15:28:10 CorNouws and this page invites people to let it know

15:28:29 CorNouws and also it makes them understand that we try to be aware of what is pleaying around

15:28:54 CorNouws and to see where we can help (and be clear if we cannot - sorry Obama)

15:29:15 louis_to CorNouws: all this presumes that the "community" will use this service

15:29:17 CorNouws sophi: Sorry, was typing, not reading ;-)

15:29:33 louis_to my guess is that .. maybe

15:29:44 CorNouws sophi: Yes, but as stated on the page: after tallking to a cc member, to prevent to much cluttering

15:29:57 louis_to but isn't it also the project lead's responsibility to inform the council of issues, problems, etc.?

15:30:03 louis_to (or shoudln't it be?)

15:30:25 CorNouws louis_to: so that is a good route for imput

15:30:46 mhu so we discussed as first agenda topic today

15:31:20 CorNouws Plsu that I think when people see that the list exists and that we pay attention (might it be limited due to planning contraints ;-) ) it motivates to use it

15:31:23 mhu s/so/as/

15:31:28 sophi louis_to: some issue are transversal and may be not seen or project leads are too invested in there project to get the distance

15:31:35 CorNouws mhu: Yip

15:31:50 CorNouws sophi: indeed.

15:32:17 _Nesshof_ http://ooo.services.openoffice.org/~mh93703/OpenOfficePlanning.odt may be the link to step into planning

15:32:26 CorNouws plsu: also ' ordinary ' community members may have ideas / needs, and maybe do not knwo a route via a project lead

15:33:31 louis_to CorNouws: so this wd. replace the (already replaced agenda@ list) the agenda wiki?

15:33:51 louis_to which, we all know, is open to all to add items to? (we know this, others probably do not)

15:33:53 CorNouws _Nesshof_: Thanks!

15:34:27 CorNouws louis_to: No, not as agenda for our council meetings pls.

15:34:38 CorNouws A permanet place for ...

15:35:32 CorNouws Cause: we know we have to work on recources for development (to mention just one) but do not need to discuss that every fourth noght

15:35:34 CorNouws do we ?

15:35:46 louis_to no

15:35:56 louis_to pointless; time moves in jerks

15:36:15 louis_to so, what would be the relation then between the wiki agenda and this site?

15:36:26 louis_to ie, how do we place things there on the agenda?

15:36:35 CorNouws Thalion72: Any opinions on the page, idea?

15:36:44 louis_to historically, all items could find their way on the agenda

15:36:59 Thalion72 CorNouws: No - not at themo moment

15:37:03 louis_to for community submissions, most were acceptable; the few that were not were obviously not

15:37:04 CorNouws louis_to: when we think it is time to discuss it, we use our brains (try to ;-) )

15:37:30 CorNouws Thalion72: Thanks

15:37:39 Thalion72 CorNouws: I just think, the page is usefull

15:37:42 louis_to so you see this then as a kind of mix between a forum (community discussion) and raw material for agenda items?

15:37:49 CorNouws May I propose that I pick it up, after what this discussion has brought us?

15:37:59 louis_to wait..

15:38:05 CorNouws louis_to: I'll try to wxplain on list, OK

15:38:07 louis_to why not just revive the agenda list?

15:38:16 louis_to it's agenda@council

15:38:22 louis_to open to all (spammers, too!)

15:38:23 CorNouws types fast, but lots of errors - sorriee

15:38:39 Thalion72 louis_to: I see the wiki page mor as a place for strategic palnning, while tha agenda is for ad-hoc discussion

15:38:44 louis_to we simply grab as before items suggested by those who post there

15:39:01 louis_to how does that differ, besides being easier, from the suggestion?

15:39:08 mhu thinks, agenda has much shorter time scale than what Cor is thinking of

15:39:09 CorNouws louis_to: As said: i propose to continue on the list first, and return to this the next time... OK?

15:39:20 CorNouws mhu: go it :-)

15:39:23 louis_to very well:

15:39:28 louis_to okay

15:39:33 mhu :-)

15:39:37 Thalion72 louis_to: you do not really ask, how strategic planning differs from ad-hoc discussion?

15:39:43 sophi CorNouws: the more you wait, the more I'll complete it :)

15:39:47 louis_to then AI to continue to refine idea on the list, taking in to account discussions here

15:40:01 CorNouws sophi: I count you in :-)

15:40:03 louis_to Thalion72: no> I am thinking of what vehicles we have to reach the community

15:40:09 CorNouws thanks all..

15:40:32 louis_to thanks, CorNouws

15:40:47 mhu has to leave in about 5 min (or at least switch back to read-only mode)

15:40:52 louis_to oooh, booy, finally, #3, coordinator

15:40:59 louis_to I too have another meeting coming up

15:41:11 CorNouws louis_to: :-)

15:41:29 louis_to shall we move to #3 or discuss it onlist and then revisit it next meeting?

15:41:44 louis_to I would prefer that option but await others' views

15:41:45 CorNouws We had a discussion on the lis already

15:41:49 sophi +1 for the idea however

15:41:51 louis_to I kow...

15:42:38 CorNouws well, discussion maybe is a bit to much said

15:43:22 louis_to Given the time, I propose that we table (postpone) discussions on #3 and subsequent items and visit these onlist and discuss / resolve next meeting

15:43:42 louis_to please indicate your approval/ disapproval to adjourn with above obligation

15:43:49 mhu +1

15:43:52 sophi +1

15:43:58 CorNouws You mean that each who says: next meeting

15:44:05 Thalion72 next item is easy .. MArtin revised his wording on releases@ooo

15:44:07 CorNouws will also join the list for discussion?

15:44:55 louis_to CorNouws; I do not understand. I'm asking to adjourn and discuss as needed on the list and then have these items to conclude next meeting

15:45:58 CorNouws Yes, and I ask that everyone who agrees, promises not to sleep when there is a mail on the list ;-)

15:46:03 louis_to indeed.

15:46:19 sophi CorNouws: I promise :)

15:46:19 louis_to once again, I thank Cor for being... Cor

15:46:24 louis_to :-)

15:46:28 mhu :-)

15:46:32 CorNouws louis_to: ;-)

15:46:33 louis_to so, any objections to adjourning the meeting now?

15:46:48 CorNouws Any urgent matters in AI??

15:47:03 Thalion72 hmm .. no

15:47:03 louis_to yes; as stated, the AI re l10n server

15:47:12 Thalion72 uhh .. stop - yes

15:47:13 louis_to and yours regarding growth

15:47:20 louis_to and one other.k

15:47:20 sophi Andre: Louis: could you give an update about upcoming meetings on trademarks and budget ?

15:47:26 Thalion72 we should prepare the elections ;)

15:47:34 louis_to yes. these must be done.

15:47:42 *** paveljanik (n=Pavel@unaffiliated/paveljanik) has joined the channel

15:47:43 CorNouws louis_to: No I mean the AI? from the last meeting

15:47:45 louis_to these are lingering AIs that have not been resolved

15:47:58 paveljanik Hi

15:47:59 louis_to Ah; yes, that is one, electons; trademarks is another

15:48:04 CorNouws Thalion72: nearly forgot that one :-\

15:48:10 paveljanik Sorry for being late, I just came back :-(

15:48:11 louis_to hi paveljanik: we are close to concluding meeting

15:48:17 CorNouws paveljanik: good morning ;-)

15:48:36 Thalion72 elections: I can start with a wiki page this weekend (what we need to prepare, what the timeline should be ..)

15:48:45 louis_to AI: louis to send to CC list elections call

15:48:58 CorNouws Worries about security event in Amsterdam an d publicity!

15:48:59 louis_to and I guess work with Thalion72:

15:49:05 louis_to ?

15:49:14 sophi Thalion72: ok, I'll monitor and add my remarks :)

15:49:33 louis_to trademark: I think sending to CC list an update is best.

15:49:33 CorNouws Worries about release and issue ??? (lack of speed with Fontwork) and our marketing goals ..

15:49:42 louis_to I note that we are progressively getting more public on the issues

15:50:12 sophi CorNouws: we all have our own issues on the next release ;)

15:50:25 louis_to So: Thalion72: to create informative wiki this weekend, aided by Sophie and Louis and louis and Thalion72 and others to commence the elections next week.

15:50:28 louis_to is next week okay?

15:50:51 louis_to We (Sophi? Louis) to update CC list on trademark discussions

15:50:51 sophi louis_to: yes

15:50:57 Thalion72 louis_to: we can plan to do it next week ;)

15:51:19 louis_to finally, lingering MH AI re trademark meeting ...? MH can update onlist with status

15:51:22 sophi louis_to: Thalion72 has to have the meeting first with QA leads

15:51:28 louis_to okay

15:51:52 _Nesshof_ louis_to: i will post a summary on the tm list

15:51:54 Thalion72 sophi: huh? Me has to have a meeting? Speaking of Trademark?

15:52:07 louis_to oh, good, I wasn't the only one confused :-)

15:52:26 louis_to _Nesshof_ thanks

15:52:26 _Nesshof_ Thalion72: our yesterdays meeting

15:52:49 sophi Thalion72: Martin said that you should discuss with QA leads about TestTool and so as reliable for trademark, did I miss something?

15:53:10 Thalion72 sophi: ok - discussed this yesterday with Martin and Helge

15:53:14 _Nesshof_ sophi: no QA leads but QA automation lead

15:53:26 sophi Thalion72: _Nesshof_: ok :)

15:53:35 Thalion72 I think, Martin has now a better idea what is possible with testtool and what not

15:54:48 sophi _Nesshof_: great, so an update to trademark list on you opinion and wishes would be good :)

15:56:48 louis_to so, summary, we (minus paveljanik, mhu) have things to do; onlist, for next meeting

15:57:26 mhu still has budget AIs that he is slowly working on ...

15:57:33 louis_to again, unless anyone has objections, I'd like to adjourn this meeting. IRC log to be posted

15:57:44 louis_to (sorry mhu, didn't mean to leave you out :-) )

15:57:50 mhu :-)

15:58:51 mhu yes, please lets finish; I need to leave now anyway ...

15:58:53 louis_to meeting adjourned