Community Council Log 20100401

From Apache OpenOffice Wiki
Revision as of 20:37, 1 April 2010 by ChristophNoack (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


Date: 2010-04-01

Time: 19:30 UTC (incl. warming up)

Location: IRC


  • Christoph Noack (christoph_n)
  • Charles-H Schulz (southercross)
  • Cor Nouws (CorNouws)
  • Jürgen Schmidt (jsc)
  • Martin Hollmichel (_Nesshof_)
  • Matthias Huetsch (mhu, mhu2)
  • Pavel Janík (paveljanik)
  • Sophie Gautier (sophi, deputy of Louis Suárez-Potts)
  • Stefan Taxhet (stx12)


(20:54:56) CorNouws: ok then - any remarks with the agenda?
(20:55:05) sophi: CorNouws: yes, thanks
(20:55:37) sophi: CorNouws: oups, no, no remarks on the agenda, but thanks for leading the meeting :)
(20:56:14) CorNouws: When I look to the minutes page, especially the details are relevant
(20:56:39) CorNouws: Anyone remarks for those?
(20:56:54) CorNouws: if not ....
(20:57:20) CorNouws: .... minutes approved & thanks to Christoph
(20:58:25) CorNouws: that was #0 of the agenda. Next item
(20:58:49) CorNouws: 2010-04-01#1, a new one: Community situation
(20:59:11) CorNouws: I quote "What do we see, where are we, what are we going to do about it. "
(20:59:42) CorNouws: Looks a bit cryptic I asume?
(20:59:56) southerncross: very existential sounding
(20:59:56) sophi: CorNouws: do you expect an answer here and now?
(21:00:10) southerncross: what did you mean exactly?
(21:00:41) CorNouws: Well, it is said that we have something to do with solving conflicts in the community.
(21:01:25) sophi: CorNouws: yes, but I don't think we should discuss this here, or on a special session because it could take some times
(21:01:30) CorNouws: Looks that currently we have our best change ever.
(21:01:38) CorNouws: sophi: yes, I fully agree
(21:01:45) christoph_n: Change?
(21:01:52) ***stx12 reads chance
(21:01:53) CorNouws: but what we can do here and now
(21:02:05) CorNouws: (thanks stx12)
(21:02:19) CorNouws: is agree on that we are going to do something about it
(21:02:32) sophi: imho, we should make a summary first of what we see or where we are, and then disscuss it through the lsit or a special session
(21:02:34) southerncross: yes, at least addressing concrete issues with concrete steps
(21:02:59) CorNouws: ok ... ideas / remarks from others?
(21:03:18) christoph_n: Except "yes, please let's do that" ... no :-)
(21:03:26) sophi: CorNouws: I've material for the discussion if needed ;)
(21:04:05) CorNouws: yes, I severely lack input for this case :-)
(21:04:16) southerncross: go ahead sophi
(21:04:42) sophi: southerncross: thanks :)
(21:05:09) jsc: i propose that we first clearly define the areas, conflicts and points that we want discuss
(21:05:18) CorNouws: what do jsc, stx12, _Nesshof_, paveljanik think of the idea that we as council try to come with somthing in / for the current situation?
(21:05:29) CorNouws: jsc: thanks
(21:05:38) jsc: give all particpants some time ti think about it and schedule a special session as Sophie has proposed
(21:06:33) CorNouws: yes, and we can exchange as much as we need for preparation
(21:06:42) christoph_n: Sorry, since so many talk about "the situation" I would like to clarify it in advance. (Thanks Cor!)
(21:07:12) stx12: i don't think we have a common understanding what "current situation" means; let's reserve time to a) follow-up up on our (Cor/ST) task and b) a more general session
(21:07:47) christoph_n: So we keep this item as an reminder for some time? Would be okay for me.
(21:08:08) CorNouws: current situation = cs = crisis situation ;-)
(21:08:26) stx12: cs is computer science for me ...
(21:08:44) CorNouws: I agree that we cannot come up with a broad action or so shortly
(21:08:49) christoph_n: solving the crisis situation may require science :-)
(21:09:08) CorNouws: but would like to try to give a acurate statement shortly
(21:09:26) CorNouws: so that others in the community know that we have taken notice
(21:09:36) CorNouws: (if that might be unclear for some)
(21:09:37) sophi: stx12: it might lead to the same ;)
(21:10:02) CorNouws: and are starting to work on it
(21:10:47) CorNouws: So very basic, a clear signal, that can helpt people to feel confident and so
(21:11:29) CorNouws: I can write a little draft for that tomorrow, and see what you all feel about it ??
(21:12:00) christoph_n: Would be great, although I will be online again on Monday...
(21:12:42) CorNouws: Others ? ( _Nesshof_ & paveljanik probably hacking or so?)
(21:13:17) christoph_n: What the hack ... heck ;-)
(21:13:32) _Nesshof_: no, but I'm not really understanding what's that agenda item is about ? but may be I should !
(21:13:39) stx12: the draft would try to describe the "community situation"?
(21:14:22) CorNouws: might be delicte, if words are understood wrong, so I have no problem to send it directly to personal mail
(21:15:03) CorNouws: and when I say short.. I mean short
(21:15:58) jsc: seems that we have to define first what the AI is about ... Cor your draft probably helps to bring a common understanding to all.
(21:16:03) southerncross: May I suggest we use the wiki?
(21:16:30) southerncross: I mean CorNouws writes it on the wiki, so that edition can be easy.
(21:16:34) jsc: i would prefer mails until we have a common understanding
(21:16:48) southerncross: Or he writes it on a document and we all use OOo's nifty comment features...
(21:16:59) jsc: but i am open to everyhting
(21:17:08) CorNouws: southerncross: you got it :-)
(21:17:24) christoph_n: Less nifty than they should be ;-)
(21:17:43) southerncross: better with the comments feature. I fail to see why mails would be clearer than that.
(21:18:01) CorNouws: OK looks to me we have a common understandig for a careful start . then over to the next item on the agenda.
(21:18:19) CorNouws: 2010-03-04#1 Elections
(21:18:27) CorNouws: Looks as if everything is on track?
(21:18:30) christoph_n: May I?
(21:18:50) CorNouws: Ah yes, I see lots of info on the agenda, super!
(21:19:02) CorNouws: pls christoph_n
(21:19:06) christoph_n: From the formal point-of-view we are on track ... today we require some decisions.
(21:19:22) christoph_n: Basically: Introduction phase is finished and we should now move on to the voting phase.
(21:19:41) jsc: yep, let's start voting
(21:19:42) christoph_n: Stefan made some good proposals we should think about...
(21:19:50) christoph_n: Request 1: Do we want to use LimeSurvey like in the last year's voting?
(21:20:15) christoph_n: From my point of view: yes. (This request for decision is defined in the election process bylaws.)
(21:20:34) CorNouws: In my understanding, we decided already long time ago to do this round as the previous one
(21:20:51) christoph_n: If yes, then the bylaw has to be updated.
(21:21:34) christoph_n: What do you all think ... should we agree again (maybe faster than searching in the logs) and update the bylaw?
(21:21:44) CorNouws: christoph_n: ?
(21:21:59) CorNouws: why update the bylaw if that gives us the choice to
(21:22:11) jsc: the details in the agenda are clear, i am fine with the schedule ...
(21:22:12) CorNouws: use LimeSurevey
(21:22:33) christoph_n: Cor?
(21:22:39) stx12: +1 for linesurvey (for the 2010-03 round and forseeable future)
(21:22:47) CorNouws: christoph_n: ?
(21:22:49) sophi: I'm sorry, I didn't have time to read my mails but I see one from Drew who looks like hesitant, I need to read it carefully and may be Louis (who has received it also) will react, but it should be taken into account
(21:23:14) CorNouws: Ah, we are not talking about the current elections, but in between decide about updating bylaws?!
(21:23:28) CorNouws: who's chair here- he should have warned me :-)
(21:23:43) sophi: CorNouws: oups, sorry
(21:24:04) stx12: may i explain what the request is about?
(21:24:05) christoph_n: Cor: As far as I can see the current bylaws state "decision required". We may agree here on LimeSurvey. And we may agree to skip that question in the future ... LimeSurvey is a proven tool, I think.
(21:24:10) CorNouws: sophi: (no probs)
(21:24:34) christoph_n: stx12 --> correct?
(21:24:43) ***stx12 would just repeat christoph_n's explanation
(21:24:55) CorNouws: But as I said: we decided already to do this elections with LW
(21:25:07) CorNouws: But I have no problem to
(21:25:12) CorNouws: a. redecide that
(21:25:32) jsc: then let us vote on LimeSurvey for future and we can skip it in the future
(21:25:42) CorNouws: b. decide to go with that tool for the forseeable future
(21:25:58) CorNouws: jsc: yes. Item clear, can we vote?
(21:26:04) CorNouws: +1
(21:26:09) jsc: +1
(21:26:09) stx12: yes; +1 for a) and +1 for b)
(21:26:15) christoph_n: +1 for dedicated tooling for the voting --> today it is LS
(21:26:20) southerncross: +1 for & b)
(21:26:23) sophi: +1
(21:26:47) christoph_n: Pavel?
(21:26:52) paveljanik: +2 ;-)
(21:26:59) christoph_n: :-)
(21:27:05) jsc: clever Pavel
(21:27:05) _Nesshof_: +1
(21:27:27) christoph_n: May I update the bylaws after the election?
(21:27:33) christoph_n: Version 1.0 --> 1.1?
(21:27:48) CorNouws: yes pls, thanks
(21:27:55) christoph_n: Thank you all!
(21:28:09) christoph_n: Sophi: What about the schedule? Wait a bit?
(21:28:12) CorNouws: OK - next for elections, I also see "Proposal by Stefan/Louis/Christoph to change schedule a bit (due to the easter)"
(21:28:12) CorNouws: looks OK to me.
(21:28:12) CorNouws: Anyone thinks we need to vote
(21:28:43) sophi: christoph_n: it's ok, thanks
(21:29:01) christoph_n: So Louis will step in if required? I don't know what Drew's comment is about...
(21:29:40) sophi: christoph_n: yes, Louis should already know and he will step in when needed
(21:30:27) christoph_n: Okay, then I'll update the election page accordingly. And I would ask Stefan to take care of the LS tooling. Okay?
(21:30:40) stx12: yes
(21:30:46) christoph_n: Thank you!
(21:31:01) christoph_n: Back to Cor :-)
(21:31:05) CorNouws: OK. thanks
(21:31:10) ***stx12 would like to coordinate timing with christoph_n after meeting
(21:31:18) CorNouws: 2010-03-04#2, AI Louis, still open > next meeting
(21:31:24) christoph_n: stx --> okay
(21:31:42) CorNouws: 2010-03-04#3 Publicize the open slot at the start of the CC meetings
(21:31:46) _Nesshof_: sorry for not updating the agenda
(21:32:06) ***_Nesshof_ posted some bylaws for the public slot
(21:32:10) CorNouws: OK, but we saw you proposal on the list - thanks
(21:32:21) _Nesshof_: are we in general ok with these rules ?
(21:32:27) christoph_n: Yep, I agree with Cor's statements. It looks good!
(21:32:48) _Nesshof_: ok, then i will prepare a proposal for the announcement
(21:32:57) sophi: May I add an opinion? yes! thanks, so, please dedicate a chanel for this so the discussion may go on without disturbing the CC meeting.
(21:33:07) CorNouws: what do you think of Jürgens and My reply, Martin?
(21:33:35) _Nesshof_: yes, agreeing
(21:34:11) CorNouws: then it looks we are finished with this.
(21:34:30) CorNouws: and yes, pls prepare a prop. for announcement
(21:34:41) CorNouws: , martin
(21:35:05) _Nesshof_: ok
(21:35:15) CorNouws: thanks , nxt item pls
(21:35:17) CorNouws: 2010-03-04#4
(21:35:24) CorNouws: Work with Clayton on estimates for Developing developers documentation
(21:35:31) CorNouws: Next steps: Ongoing discussion on the CC mailing list.
(21:35:43) CorNouws: ... we have seen a little, I think.
(21:35:46) jsc: i had a short talk with Clayton and we will work next week on some drafts for the first bounties and in relation to the drafts on a set of basic rules/guideline that are necessary to run such a bounty program.
(21:35:47) CorNouws: Jürgen
(21:36:23) jsc: see also
(21:36:24) jsc:
(21:36:52) jsc: .. for some further info about bounties
(21:37:20) CorNouws: Thanks for the info and the continued attention for this
(21:37:25) christoph_n: Great!
(21:37:46) jsc: i will also start to work on a wiki page ... see my email on the list
(21:38:23) CorNouws: There is some interference with the next agenda item, Intership, as far as money is involved... anyway, probably that is the case
(21:39:36) stx12: yes, as you pointed out we (mhu, _Nesshof_ and I together with you) have to come to a conclusion how much money we can make available for these 2 efforts.
(21:39:47) jsc: well the bounties will be rather small. Ranging from 100$ up to several hundreds or for really complex tasks even more.
(21:40:08) jsc: i think we will be flexible and can adjust it when see how it works or how get accepted
(21:40:10) CorNouws: OK Jürgen
(21:40:10) CorNouws: when do you expect to have a btter view on # of bounties (total sum) neede this year?
(21:40:50) CorNouws: and then I mean rough - so up to 5, 10 or 15 K
(21:41:11) jsc: mmh, not so easy and i would postpone it until the next meeting. Probably we will learn lot with the first bounties
(21:41:31) jsc: is that ok?
(21:41:50) CorNouws: OK for now - maybe will discuss it later next week?
(21:42:13) CorNouws: More questions / remarks about this item? if not ..
(21:42:28) CorNouws: 2010-03-04#5 - Inernship
(21:42:42) CorNouws: Internship
(21:42:55) CorNouws: Preparations basically done, IMO
(21:43:09) christoph_n: (Thanks, Cor!)
(21:43:13) CorNouws: Need some clarifying about money available
(21:43:21) stx12: ... beyond or with some juggling of existing budgets
(21:43:28) CorNouws: therefore I push jsc et all
(21:43:40) CorNouws: stx12: indeed, yes
(21:44:45) CorNouws: stx12: I don't think my replay was an answer .. what dit you mean? done including the budget, or with that item to be done?
(21:44:54) CorNouws: I meant the latest
(21:45:46) stx12: the available budget is open and we have to clarify it
(21:46:43) CorNouws: yes, that is a must before we start. therefore I chase jsc et all for the sum they need for the bouties
(21:48:16) jsc: i will do my best
(21:48:43) CorNouws: That is how we know each other- great :-)
(21:48:43) CorNouws: next then...
(21:48:43) CorNouws: 2010-03-04#6 - talk to eduration project - I see no time now to work on it, and though it is important, I think it is not so urgent as other matters, so would like to push it to the next meeting..
(21:49:03) CorNouws: objections?
(21:49:22) southerncross: yes
(21:49:28) christoph_n: Okay to me.
(21:49:46) southerncross: actually: I think it has to be done this time for the next meeting.
(21:49:50) southerncross: really :)
(21:50:23) CorNouws: Well, I will try to find time.
(21:50:40) southerncross: thank you CorNouws . I can help if you need it.
(21:51:01) CorNouws: thanks, I'll keep that in mind for sure!
(21:51:12) CorNouws: so next item ..
(21:51:28) CorNouws: 2010-03-04#7 : Charles, for you
(21:53:05) CorNouws: I think in the previous meeting, when you was not there, Leif had the intention to ask you about this.
(21:53:45) CorNouws: but it comes down to the realisation of the idea
(21:54:43) CorNouws: to contact NLC's for their stories in the newsletter
(21:55:01) ***CorNouws only 5 mins left ..
(21:55:02) southerncross hat den Raum verlassen (quit: Ping timeout: 260 seconds).
(21:55:22) christoph_n: Easy come, easy go... :-)
(21:55:27) CorNouws: that were 2 seconds :-\
(21:55:37) southerncross [] hat den Raum betreten.
(21:55:41) southerncross: sorry
(21:55:45) CorNouws: OK I see nothing left on the agenda
(21:55:47) ***jsc is thinking that Cor's question was not so hard ;-)
(21:55:53) CorNouws: Hi Charles
(21:55:54) southerncross: what did Leif ask?
(21:55:58) CorNouws: ;-)
(21:56:19) CorNouws: if you could inform us about the status of the intervies for the newsletter, IIRC
(21:56:27) southerncross: ah
(21:56:29) southerncross: ok
(21:56:33) southerncross: better syncing. Sure
(21:56:42) CorNouws: thanks, may be done by mail, of course
(21:56:45) christoph_n: As I asked you via mail :-)
(21:57:04) sophi: just as a side note, I approve the Sinhala choice, it's a very good one :)
(21:57:05) southerncross: indeed, but I thought it was just about updating the AI
(21:57:21) southerncross: thanks sophi ; they also have some nice things going on
(21:58:21) CorNouws: good, look forward to these stories - very inspiring IMO
(21:58:49) CorNouws: anything else for this everening
(21:58:49) CorNouws: I have some short notes ...
(21:59:02) CorNouws: one: Next meeting: April 15. I probably won't be able to attend.
(21:59:09) christoph_n: Neither me...
(21:59:44) jsc: the same for me, i will be in Brazil
(21:59:50) christoph_n: (Ahh! Charles, could you please update the date in your AI?)
(22:00:05) CorNouws: jsc: no internet there :-) ?
(22:00:07) christoph_n: Cool!
(22:00:20) christoph_n: I think he has better things to do :-)
(22:00:28) CorNouws: only 5 hours earlier then here, you know
(22:00:38) jsc: i assume no time, will do 2 presentations and a lab
(22:01:06) CorNouws: I will be in Amsterdam, life stream presentation for the same event, by the way
(22:01:09) jsc: and most of the time i will be in a plane
(22:01:23) CorNouws: and close to or exactly the time of our CC meeting
(22:01:25) christoph_n: Okay, I'll be in Atlanta ... Computer Human Interaction conference :-)
(22:01:52) jsc: CorNouws: good to hear that ;-)
(22:01:52) ***_Nesshof_ will be @home
(22:01:57) CorNouws: enough about people not being present next time ... ugh
(22:02:07) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: ah great!
(22:02:13) CorNouws: and two: request from Christoph and me: can all update their AI's?
(22:02:43) southerncross: christoph_n: I did
(22:02:56) jsc: already done
(22:02:57) jsc: i wish you all happy Easter and a very nice long weekend
(22:03:00) CorNouws: and three: who can we appoint as volunteer for the minutes?
(22:03:06) christoph_n: Chalres --> the date :-)
(22:04:03) christoph_n: I think everybody should take care ... can we agree to have an updated agenda in ... 20 minutes?
(22:04:05) southerncross: ah
(22:04:11) southerncross: yup am on it
(22:04:48) CorNouws: ok then I close the meeting. Thanks all for everything

Personal tools