https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Council_Minutes_20080109&feed=atom&action=historyCommunity Council Minutes 20080109 - Revision history2024-03-29T01:40:18ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.23.13https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Council_Minutes_20080109&diff=169764&oldid=prevChristophNoack: Added CC template2010-05-30T14:40:54Z<p>Added CC template</p>
<table class='diff diff-contentalign-left'>
<col class='diff-marker' />
<col class='diff-content' />
<col class='diff-marker' />
<col class='diff-content' />
<tr style='vertical-align: top;'>
<td colspan='2' style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan='2' style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 14:40, 30 May 2010</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 1:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 1:</td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">{{Community_Council}}</ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>== Log, Community Council Meeting 2008-01-09 20:00 UTC ==</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>== Log, Community Council Meeting 2008-01-09 20:00 UTC ==</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
</table>ChristophNoackhttps://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Council_Minutes_20080109&diff=152589&oldid=prevB michaelsen at 16:46, 14 December 20092009-12-14T16:46:19Z<p></p>
<table class='diff diff-contentalign-left'>
<col class='diff-marker' />
<col class='diff-content' />
<col class='diff-marker' />
<col class='diff-content' />
<tr style='vertical-align: top;'>
<td colspan='2' style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan='2' style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 16:46, 14 December 2009</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 496:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 496:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>---</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>---</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Meeting adjourns, 21:40</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Meeting adjourns, 21:40</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">[[Category:Community Council]]</ins></div></td></tr>
</table>B michaelsenhttps://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Council_Minutes_20080109&diff=59968&oldid=prevLouisSuarez at 21:55, 9 January 20082008-01-09T21:55:04Z<p></p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>== Log, Community Council Meeting 2008-01-09 20:00 UTC ==<br />
<br />
===Attendees===<br />
* Sophie Gautier (sophi)<br />
* Martin Hollmichel (_Nesshof__)<br />
* André Schnabel (Thalion72)<br />
* Louis Suarez-Potts (louis_to)<br />
* Stefan Taxhet (stx12)<br />
* Matthias Huetsch (mhu)<br />
* Cor Nouws (cornouw1, CorNouws)<br />
* Pavel Janík (paveljanik)<br />
* John McCreesh (jpmcc)<br />
<br />
----<br />
IRC meeting commences 20:00 UTC (more or less)<br />
<br />
<pre><br />
louis_to so, let's start. Stefan (st) will be a few minutes late, he indicated<br />
louis_to First, welcome CorNouws!<br />
Thalion72 Welcome Cor!<br />
CorNouws Thanks, Louis, Pleasure to be here!<br />
sophi ok CorNouws: welcome and good evening<br />
CorNouws Thanks, André, for the suggestion ;-)<br />
louis_to Cor, in case you do not know....<br />
CorNouws Thanks, Sophie, for your support,<br />
louis_to mhu: Matthias Huetsch<br />
* Thalion72 is accepting the thanks before Cor changes his mind<br />
CorNouws :-)))<br />
louis_to _Nesshof_: Martin Hollmichel<br />
CorNouws OK, the rest of the names i know.<br />
louis_to right<br />
louis_to so, the agenda is on the wiki:<br />
louis_to http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/The_OpenOffice.org_Community_Council_Agenda<br />
mhu Hi all; welcome Cor.<br />
CorNouws Hi Matthias<br />
paveljanik Hi<br />
louis_to The last meeting was 06 Dec. Minutes, AIs, etc.:<br />
louis_to http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council_Minutes#2007-12-06<br />
CorNouws Hi Pavel. Sorry I forgot to say hello to you.<br />
louis_to please review them.... <br />
Thalion72 i have no additions<br />
paveljanik CorNouws: ;-)<br />
louis_to I move to approve last meeting's minutes. All in favour? (note formal process)<br />
louis_to +1<br />
Thalion72 +1<br />
paveljanik +1<br />
mhu +1<br />
CorNouws (no comment)<br />
sophi +1<br />
jpmcc (no comment)<br />
_Nesshof_ +1<br />
louis_to minutes approved<br />
louis_to Items for this week continue from last time<br />
louis_to sophi: any news on the next AB meeting?<br />
sophi louis_to: no every body seems in holliday at its turn, so no news till the end of the month<br />
CorNouws I have read 17-12 was planned, was it posphoned?<br />
Thalion72 do we know a date for the next AB meeting?<br />
Thalion72 CorNouws: yes<br />
sophi no, not now, at the end of january I think<br />
louis_to okay. I'd urge us all to read the minutes of the AB meeting.<br />
CorNouws done, of course.<br />
louis_to please consider discusisng items of concern next CC meeting<br />
*** stx12 (i=stx12@p548E5CA8.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined the channel<br />
paveljanik yes, for sure.<br />
louis_to eg, license<br />
* stx12 wishes happy new year<br />
louis_to hi stx12<br />
paveljanik Hi Stefan!<br />
Thalion72 hi stx12 .. to you too<br />
sophi hi Stefan, thanks and same for you<br />
mhu Hi stx12<br />
CorNouws Hi Stephan, the best wishes for 2OOo8<br />
Thalion72 louis_to: maybe we should discuss, what we as a community ecpect from the AB<br />
louis_to now or next time?<br />
* louis_to suggests next time<br />
Thalion72 e.g. I've completely missed points, what the AB is going to help the community<br />
sophi as soon as I've a new date for the AB meeting, I'll post it<br />
louis_to I agree with Andre<br />
louis_to and would propose:<br />
Thalion72 louis_to: next time .. we may prepare this on mailing lists<br />
louis_to (yes)<br />
louis_to we ask the community what it expects and wants from the AB<br />
sophi Thalion72: I can enlight what have been discussed on the CC list by the end of the week<br />
louis_to with a range that can be deduced from the minutes sophi sent<br />
CorNouws Aren't AB members part of the community? (discussion already started ;-) )<br />
louis_to CorNouws: debatable point<br />
CorNouws Ok, w?l do that on the list or so<br />
Thalion72 CorNouws: moire or less but I have e.g. no idea, what the current contributions of Canonical and Google are<br />
jpmcc Thalion72: or IBM<br />
CorNouws The fact alone that 2 of the 3 are know as suporters is an important contribution.<br />
* sophi hopes you know her ;)<br />
CorNouws allthough the project cannot thrive from such contributions alone, of course<br />
louis_to so: who wants to own this AI?<br />
* louis_to suggests Andre<br />
CorNouws AI - agenda item?<br />
louis_to yes.<br />
louis_to action item, actually<br />
Thalion72 ok ok...<br />
CorNouws or shre it, André<br />
Thalion72 I'll take this<br />
louis_to thanks; <br />
louis_to CorNouws: I have learned from the master that better to have a slingle owner for any action item<br />
Thalion72 CorNouws: I'd be happy to share (we can discuss this later)<br />
louis_to http://professionalsuperhero.com/<br />
CorNouws One owner, one supporter. OK for me (sorry for typoooos)<br />
louis_to on to next item....<br />
louis_to sophi: would you have more updates on the certication process?<br />
sophi louis_to: not much more than what I'v wrote to the list, work in progress<br />
louis_to http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=1349<br />
louis_to Okay, some questions, then....<br />
louis_to are we ready to work with ECDL?<br />
sophi louis_to: no, not yet, we are not finishet with the syllabus<br />
louis_to okay. <br />
louis_to should we move ahead with funding a contributor to work on this?<br />
sophi louis_to: yes, this is what we have said, so we should do it :)<br />
louis_to do you or the team have anyone in mind?<br />
sophi louis_to: Franz Jacob and Leif Lodal have work hard on that<br />
sophi louis_to: Franz have written all and is maintaining the documents<br />
CorNouws can I ask a related question?<br />
sophi CorNouws: of course :)<br />
Thalion72 ok, sophie -can you write a breif proposal, what the fund would be used for?<br />
sophi Thalion72: ok<br />
CorNouws when we have the criteria, is the accreditation pickud up automatically? how does that work?<br />
sophi CorNouws: it's a bit long to explain here, may be I'll sum up the process on the CC list<br />
CorNouws Ok, maybe there? omething in the archive alraedy, that you can point to<br />
louis_to sophi: thanks<br />
louis_to CorNouws: I don't think so....<br />
CorNouws well, in that case thanks for the info to come!<br />
sophi louis_to: we can find most of the process on the certification list<br />
louis_to AI: sophie to write up a proposal for how the funding of a contributor would work and what it would produce...<br />
sophi louis_to: ok<br />
louis_to sophi: ah, good. certification@documentation.openoffice.org < i think<br />
louis_to shall we move on then to the next item?<br />
sophi louis_to: yes, between Evan and me, the sum up is done, but I'll post on the CC list<br />
louis_to sophi: thanks!<br />
louis_to next item....<br />
louis_to I had suggested adding nonvoting members to the CC discussions<br />
jpmcc for exmaaple?<br />
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<br />
stx12 hm, how would we benefit from that?<br />
louis_to jpmcc: example would be, say, to allow people from the AB to particiipate in discussions but not vote<br />
mhu what do you intend with this addition?<br />
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<br />
louis_to mhu: to include more stakeholder discussions.<br />
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...<br />
louis_to example: the ESC has nonvoting members, I believe<br />
* Thalion72 agrees to stx12<br />
jpmcc I would have no issue if the AB wanted to nominate one observer / liaison member to the CC<br />
louis_to jpmcc: you mean, besides sophi?<br />
mhu louis_to: the ESC has guest members, intention is to promote them to full members after some time<br />
jpmcc The CC has one member on the AB (sophi), maybe the AB should have one member on the CC<br />
sophi for my opinion it's too early, the AB has to find his place and define itself first<br />
mhu sophi: yes, absolutely<br />
Thalion72 sophi: you may ask this at the next AB meeting <br />
sophi after the second meeting, if there has been some work done, we will discuss it<br />
jpmcc I think to get the AB to agree on a single rep would be a test of its effectivenes and maturity<br />
louis_to uhm, it's only had one meeting, john :-)<br />
jpmcc Yes, but look at the collective salary of the people there :)<br />
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)<br />
louis_to I'm open to Thalion72's and stx12's modulation<br />
sophi Thalion72: yes I agree also with this idea<br />
jpmcc louis_to: can you play it back as a proposal?<br />
louis_to yes...<br />
louis_to To allow nonvoting participation in discussions by exponents of proposals or those implicated <br />
louis_to is that fair?<br />
mhu sounds good<br />
sophi louis_to: yes<br />
jpmcc yes, not sure it's English ;-)<br />
stx12 hm, sounds complicated to me<br />
* louis_to aside to jpmcc: it's not, really, but telegraphs the message<br />
louis_to stx12: how so?<br />
stx12 non-voting members may participate on invitation to present on proposals.<br />
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"<br />
paveljanik chair?<br />
jpmcc LS-P<br />
mhu jmpcc: good, and even English :-)<br />
*** CorNouw1 (n=cono@a80-100-71-226.adsl.xs4all.nl) has joined the channel<br />
CorNouw1 seems I was out of connction, some time...<br />
jpmcc Cor suffers from split personality<br />
_Nesshof_ louis_to: where do you want to add this statement ? in the charter ?<br />
Thalion72 no .. why should we?<br />
stx12 in the unwritten bylaws :-)<br />
mhu yes, bylaws.<br />
louis_to Ithink it would have to be where we specify it<br />
_Nesshof_ stx12: just want to ask for written bylaws<br />
louis_to I mean where we specify the current rule<br />
jpmcc Yes, I propose we note this on the CC page on the website<br />
*** sophi has quit IRC (Excess Flood)<br />
louis_to the current rule may be in the charter; I forget. if it is, then we must amend it as normal<br />
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).<br />
louis_to hm. we lost sophie....<br />
louis_to stx12: +1<br />
*** sophi (n=sophie@m168.net81-64-15.noos.fr) has joined the channel<br />
Thalion72 moment .. what is a "consensus for the veto against participation ..."?<br />
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.<br />
louis_to Thalion72: I think I answered your query<br />
Thalion72 hmm .. if one council meber needs to propose the participation we will never reach a consensus veto<br />
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."<br />
Thalion72 jpmcc: yes - this would work<br />
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.<br />
mhu john, but we don't have majority votes.<br />
*** CorNouws has quit IRC (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))<br />
Thalion72 and we cannot reach real consensus<br />
Thalion72 so .. anyway I'm fine with the consensus (at least, as long as I suggest someone for participation ;) )<br />
louis_to Thalion72: no evidence we cannot reach consensus. We usually do....<br />
CorNouw1 My IRC prog is bugging me, but ...<br />
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".<br />
CorNouw1 the agenda states 'adding nonvoting members'<br />
_Nesshof_ mhu: I think we can have mojority votes for items described in the bylaws<br />
CorNouw1 thus I have to read that': allowing them to attend one meeting' ?<br />
mhu yes, but I do favour consensus votes over majority votes<br />
Thalion72 CorNouw1: the current discussion is about guests for one meeting - yes<br />
stx12 _Nesshof_: but we shouldn't; we should stick to operate on consensus<br />
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<br />
Thalion72 let'S stick with consensus .. even if we will never reach it<br />
jpmcc let's vote on that;-)<br />
CorNouw1 consensus is ok for me for sure<br />
* _Nesshof_ think that for internal procedures majority votes are considerable, but also have no problem with consensus voting<br />
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<br />
louis_to so, reframed from above, AI.. LSP using "consensus."<br />
Thalion72 this would mean, the proposing council members need to agree to deny<br />
louis_to shall we continue?<br />
Thalion72 yes - please<br />
sophi yes<br />
CorNouw1 ok<br />
mhu yes<br />
jpmcc +<br />
louis_to trademark:<br />
louis_to the discussion (nonexistent) is on trademark@council.openoffice.org<br />
louis_to the points are:<br />
louis_to * use Mozilla's trademark policy, written to apply to OOo<br />
louis_to ie, only OOo from the OOo repository is officially OOo (redistribution is okay)<br />
louis_to additions, enhancements, substractions, are "based on OpenOffice.org code"<br />
louis_to that is one part<br />
Thalion72 this should really be disussed at large on the lists before we vote<br />
louis_to right, we cannot vote on it now. I am merely giving update <br />
Thalion72 esp. wehn we are going to use Mozilla'S tm policy<br />
louis_to yes.<br />
Thalion72 and are going to defend it in the same way<br />
louis_to so, discussion is on trademark@council<br />
louis_to I have really dragged on this<br />
Thalion72 hmm?<br />
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<br />
Thalion72 sorry, I cannot remember many posts about a clear policy at this list<br />
louis_to there have not been many, aka, none<br />
Thalion72 can we please think more about what the community wants and needs on this issue?<br />
louis_to so, shall we table this until discussions on trademark@ have matured?<br />
sophi louis_to: yes<br />
louis_to Thalion72: that is what we are talking about<br />
sophi louis_to: we should first formulate it on the list then present it to the community<br />
CorNouw1 Question: Is defending the tm the same issue as using one official OOo repository?<br />
mhu louis_to: we need at least a proposal to think about and then discuss<br />
louis_to sophi: yes<br />
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<br />
louis_to mhu yes, that's why I asked to table this until discusison has matured<br />
louis_to Thalion72: of course.<br />
mhu louis_to: I simply wanted to agree :-)<br />
*** stx12 has quit IRC (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))<br />
louis_to so, on to next item?<br />
Thalion72 do we have an AI defined?<br />
jpmcc could we set ourselves a target date for the trademark policy?<br />
*** stx12 (i=stx12@p548E5CA8.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined the channel<br />
louis_to it's the old one: establish a trademark policy<br />
louis_to jpmcc: I'd be happy to go with that<br />
sophi louis_to: the new one is based on Mozilla ;)<br />
louis_to say, two weeks? That would be for initial proposal that can be discussed by the community<br />
jpmcc +1<br />
Thalion72 +1<br />
sophi +1<br />
CorNouw1 first on trademark@council ?<br />
_Nesshof_ +1<br />
sophi CorNouw1: yes<br />
Thalion72 yes<br />
CorNouw1 +1<br />
* stx12 needs help what we are voting on<br />
louis_to CorNouw1: yes. you may join<br />
CorNouw1 pls, thanks<br />
louis_to stx12: deadline for initial trademark policy to be subsequently discused by community; discussions for proposal creation on trademark@council<br />
mhu +1<br />
Thalion72 louis_to: can you please add Mark Moeller (if hi is not yet on the tm list)<br />
louis_to sure<br />
Thalion72 (he knows the problems of Portable apps and Mozillas TM-policy quite well)<br />
louis_to indeed....<br />
stx12 I'm happy to vote vote on deadlines for other people's AIs<br />
stx12 who owns this?<br />
Thalion72 louis?<br />
CorNouw1 that's what I thought when voting +1<br />
mhu louis_to: [side note: sorry, but the hour is over, and I want to leave; can we come to an end for today?]<br />
louis_to Louis owns it<br />
louis_to mnu: one hour is too short but let's see if we can end this for today<br />
CorNouw1 budget ?!<br />
louis_to are all in favour of adjourning for today?<br />
Thalion72 looking at the agenda - do we need urgendly vote about something?<br />
louis_to CorNouw1: we can discuss budget on the list; might be better there, anyway<br />
Thalion72 louis_to: what's about Fosdem budget?<br />
CorNouw1 OK for me.<br />
louis_to Thalion72: there are no specifics to it yet<br />
mhu louis_to: if one hour is too short, we need to start earlier (UTC wise).<br />
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<br />
Thalion72 well.. Eric B. asked for funds .. and costs will raise if booket to late<br />
louis_to Eric B asked for funds before the committee had been formed<br />
louis_to but I am sure that he and other presenters will be funded<br />
louis_to I am ware of the cost issue.<br />
CorNouw1 about ending this meeting: what does 'account of AB meeting' means?<br />
jpmcc Can we agreed to fund EB now (and maybe save money?)<br />
louis_to I would suggest that we can assure the committee members of funding<br />
louis_to shall we vote on that?<br />
jpmcc What's the total exposure (roughly)?<br />
louis_to Proposal: to fund fosdem committee members and early participants of travel and lodging<br />
sophi +1<br />
Thalion72 EB's estimation was about 300EUR<br />
louis_to for EB, about 300-400 eur<br />
louis_to I would rather do this, however:<br />
jpmcc So 300-400 per person for how many people?<br />
Thalion72 commitee is 3 people afaik<br />
louis_to jpmcc for the comittee it's just three<br />
louis_to plus me<br />
louis_to dieter, juergen, eric<br />
louis_to diter and juergen are sunnies; as am I<br />
louis_to so, just eric for no<br />
louis_to now, I mean<br />
sophi but may be others will attend ? no ?<br />
CorNouw1 so that? about 35% of the 2008 budget?<br />
louis_to yes, but this is just for funding for the committee<br />
mhu so, only eric is requesting funding (others are funded by Sun, I assume) ?<br />
louis_to eric requested funding early--before we had formed the committee to evaluate who will even be going<br />
sophi If one other community member want to attend, he won't be funded?<br />
louis_to sophi: no. the propsoal is for *early* <br />
louis_to requests.<br />
Thalion72 ok .. so I would suggest we vote for EB .. and ask the committe to come up with a budget for other spendings<br />
louis_to I would rather set aside a lot more money for all funding requests<br />
louis_to Thalion72: +1<br />
sophi but this was proposed ont the lead list, what if other developers want to participate?<br />
louis_to we should allow them to, if possible.<br />
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.<br />
louis_to we have two days at fosdem<br />
Thalion72 jpmcc: +1<br />
louis_to I'd guess max 10 people may participate, and some of those will be sun<br />
mhu jmpcc: yes, sounds acceptable<br />
stx12 louis_to: i wouldn't assume that sunnies are funded by default<br />
louis_to jpmcc: i'd suggest we ask the fosdem committe to supply us a budget<br />
louis_to stx12: good point<br />
paveljanik stx12: funded by...?<br />
sophi ok for me, but let some others to be funded too<br />
paveljanik by Sun?<br />
stx12 louis_to: i wouldn't assume that sunnies are funded by default by sun<br />
paveljanik or by "us"?<br />
louis_to my guess is that we will be talking about 2000 eu. <br />
Thalion72 stx12: so they should request funds from other sources early ;)<br />
paveljanik hmm, I'd like to see some result of the committee first. Who and how many people will go there.<br />
jpmcc Eric has acted promptly and got his funding request in early. We should reward enthusiasm and forward planning.<br />
Thalion72 sorry, but I see no reason to delay one request, just because we are not aware of other requests yet<br />
paveljanik I do not want to vote about EB's spendings if we do not know if he is selected to be there.<br />
louis_to eric will be there, I have no doubt; he is also on the committee<br />
louis_to I have no doubt he will be there as there has not been that enthusiastic a response<br />
Thalion72 paveljanik: so.. we can make clear tha money will nly be spend, if he presents at FOSDEM<br />
Thalion72 (I never thought about this, as this is obvious to me)<br />
sophi louis_to: some dev from my company would like to participate, but nothing has come public yet<br />
paveljanik Thalion72: well, hmm. I'd like our project to be represented there. I do not want our project ot be there (only).<br />
louis_to please make it public. I asked on the project leads list to publicize it among your communities... <br />
louis_to thanks<br />
paveljanik and I'm not very satisfied with Eric's skills to represent our project. Unfortunately.<br />
paveljanik I'd like to see more developers there.<br />
louis_to paveljanik: more than eric will be there<br />
sophi louis_to: ok, so I let the commitee knows about them, they are already known in the OOo community<br />
paveljanik as this is for developers.<br />
Thalion72 well .. so we can vote anyway<br />
louis_to erici is but one. thorsten, Dieter will be there; Juergen too, I am sure<br />
louis_to but this is uncertain b/c the committee has yet to go over submissions<br />
paveljanik did they requested funding as well?<br />
louis_to paveljanik: no<br />
louis_to or at least not yet. holidays really affected timing<br />
paveljanik so we can only vote about EB now. If at all.<br />
louis_to paveljanik: prcisely<br />
louis_to I would like to call a vote on the proposal raised<br />
paveljanik so, my vote is +1 for covering travel and lodging for EB if we (the formed committee) can't find better candidates.<br />
Thalion72 ok: as this has been on the agenda for long, I also call for a vote<br />
louis_to paveljanik: hm. that is a little offensive<br />
sophi +1<br />
paveljanik offensive? Sorry?<br />
louis_to and I dont' think we can vote on that<br />
paveljanik how offensive?<br />
paveljanik I do not understand.<br />
stx12 paveljanik: with this restriction one (EB) can't make the preparations<br />
Thalion72 "the formed committe" is the FOSDEM commitee?<br />
paveljanik Thalion72: yes.<br />
louis_to "if we cannot find better candidates"?<br />
louis_to I would urge a vote as john put it:<br />
louis_to limit to 400 euros to present at fosdem<br />
Thalion72 so it is up to the FOSDEM committe (where EB is member) to send EB to Fosdem or not?<br />
stx12 out of the markting budget<br />
paveljanik Thalion72: yes.<br />
louis_to and to urge the fosdem committee to come up with a budget for travel/lodging<br />
paveljanik out of marketing? ;-) +10 ;-)<br />
louis_to Thalion72: yes<br />
Thalion72 so I have no problem with pavel's wording<br />
* stx12 is following _Nesshof_'s proposal<br />
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, ...<br />
louis_to which is?<br />
paveljanik people who can answer questions?<br />
paveljanik ;-)<br />
louis_to how is this different form 400 eu. for prsenting?<br />
louis_to not just for being on the committee?<br />
paveljanik ?<br />
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."<br />
mhu does this discussion lead us anywhere?<br />
louis_to jpmcc: i think the trend is to have it iff and only if<br />
paveljanik ... if fosdem committee will select his proposed paper.<br />
paveljanik ok?<br />
louis_to mhu: yes, a vote on allocating funds<br />
louis_to paveljanik: yes<br />
Thalion72 paveljanik: this is exactly what Eric requested btw.<br />
paveljanik Thalion72: :-)<br />
paveljanik then +1.<br />
Thalion72 Eric Bachard asked for funding (in case his presentation is accepted). <br />
Thalion72 (quote from agenda)<br />
paveljanik accepted by fosdem or by committee?<br />
Thalion72 ok .. vote on jpmccs wording: +1<br />
CorNouw1 +1<br />
louis_to +1 on proopasl modulo acceptance of paper (or whatever is presented)<br />
* stx12 would agree for the sake of shorten the meeting; but...<br />
stx12 so, do we (CC) grant the funds to EB or to the committee?<br />
* sophi has already voted +1<br />
* Thalion72 loves consensus voting :)<br />
Thalion72 to Eric<br />
paveljanik because he asked for funding.<br />
Thalion72 maybe we shouold have asked *not* to fund Eric <br />
paveljanik that's clear.<br />
paveljanik and terrible at the same time.<br />
* mhu would refund EB's expenses, but not allocate a fund (that's what Martin is preparing)<br />
* stx12 thinks we should reorder the agenda next time<br />
paveljanik :-(<br />
Thalion72 one -1 vote was enough to approve the funds<br />
paveljanik Thalion72: ?<br />
paveljanik -1? approve?<br />
louis_to stx12: I agree. last time I tried reordering the agenda, it didn't go over well<br />
louis_to however, this is going on....<br />
jpmcc ...and on...<br />
louis_to all, have we voted on this item?<br />
stx12 then it woul dbe clear who is in charge of marketing funds <br />
louis_to stx12, _Nesshof_?<br />
* mhu asked to come to an end 30min ago ...<br />
Thalion72 mhu: yes ... but you know - conensus voting<br />
_Nesshof_ stx12: that will make live more easy<br />
louis_to if we cannot agree, then please lt us continue this on the list and set a deadline:<br />
louis_to Friday<br />
Thalion72 louis_to: this is nonsense .. sorry<br />
louis_to but I would urge us to consider calling this meeting to a close<br />
Thalion72 ant state that we cannot reach consensus<br />
jpmcc Has anyone voted -1 ?<br />
louis_to by my tally we do have a consensus of +1s and no -1s<br />
paveljanik no<br />
louis_to but not all have voted.<br />
stx12 +1<br />
_Nesshof_ I would vote if there is a promise that we are going to approve the budget and will never these endless discussion again<br />
_Nesshof_ +1<br />
louis_to _Nesshof_ we can also use the list<br />
CorNouw1 +1<br />
mhu +1 (and agreeing to Martin's comments)<br />
louis_to and this discssion has not been endless, btw: it just ended. And we spent only 25 minutes o nit<br />
stx12 can we please have the topic budget on the upper half of next meeting's agenda<br />
louis_to yes.<br />
louis_to and we can also use the list.<br />
mhu and we're only 35min over time :-(<br />
Thalion72 yes<br />
Thalion72 (yes - using the list)<br />
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<br />
louis_to so, we are all tired of this and I call this meeting to end.<br />
jpmcc +1<br />
Thalion72 ok<br />
sophi louis_to: ok<br />
louis_to AI for funding Eric's trip to fosdem: ST?<br />
mhu louis_to: but not at this time of day (night in western europe)<br />
CorNouw1 about ending this meeting: what does 'account of AB meeting' means?<br />
louis_to CorNouw1: a report as we had it from Sophie of the Advidosry Board meeting<br />
CorNouw1 OK, so can wait<br />
louis_to CorNouw1: we had it<br />
stx12 i think this should be an AI of a committee member;<br />
louis_to stx12: but I have no part in Team; Does Dieter?<br />
sophi CorNouw1: I've already done it, I will make an update on the list<br />
stx12 the money transfer - if appropriate - is the smallest part.<br />
Thalion72 and what input we got from AB .. and will give to the AB<br />
louis_to stx12: ah.<br />
mhu all, I'm now leaving; good night.<br />
jpmcc Here's some bedtime reading for those who have kids: http://www.stayathomeserver.com/book.aspx<br />
louis_to okay, will take it<br />
stx12 i think this should be an AI of a FOSDEM committee member;<br />
paveljanik good night<br />
Thalion72 cu mhu<br />
louis_to bye mnu<br />
louis_to mhu<br />
sophi good night<br />
louis_to meeting adjoruned, good night all<br />
</pre><br />
<br />
---<br />
Meeting adjourns, 21:40</div>LouisSuarez