Community Council Minutes 20080327

Attendees

Stefan Taxhet (stx12) Martin Hollmichel (_Nesshof__) Louis Suarez-Potts (louis_to) (chair) Matthias Huetsch (mhu) Cor Nouws (CorNouws) Pavel Janík (paveljanik) John McCreesh (jpmcc)

André Schnabel and Pavel Janík could not attend

IRC meeting commences 17:41 UTC (timestamp is -0400)

[13:41:20] louis_to nevertheless, we can commence
[13:41:35] louis_to agenda is here:
[13:41:40] louis_to http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/The_OpenOffice.org_Community_Council_Agenda
[13:41:48] louis_to I failed to send out the summary of elections
[13:41:53] louis_to or trademark
[13:42:07] louis_to so let's start with news from latest AB meeting: sophie?
[13:42:26] louis_to (WWDC will come shortly)
[13:42:45] sophi new from the latest AB was about the licence and SCA changes
[13:43:22] louis_to that's it? :-)
[13:43:39] sophi AB wants also to participate to the OOoCon organization
[13:44:12] louis_to sophi: did they offer details?
[13:44:15] sophi But I've no more news since the last mail I sent last week about the amount 
[13:44:20] louis_to ah.
[13:44:40] louis_to anything else, then?
[13:44:43] sophi louis_to: no, I'll write them again 
[13:44:45] CorNouws sophi: what mail / list? Seems I missed it.
[13:45:00] CorNouws Also: I expected more or less public anouncements about SCA and such, as result from the AB meeting ...
[13:45:05] CorNouws Can't remember how that idea came into my mind ;-)
[13:45:19] sophi the foundation is not yet in discussion, may be next year or in two years (if I understand well)
[13:45:50] louis_to CorNouws: We have had the license/sca account on the OOo homepage since the change...
[13:46:21] jpmcc sophi: We need some way to engage the AB members directly about OOoCon without waiting for the next meeting. Any suggestions?
[13:46:42] louis_to jpmcc: we can have, as I suggested, non-voting members
[13:46:48] louis_to and include the AB in that category
[13:47:06] sophi jpmcc: may be setting a list and invite them ?
[13:47:18] jpmcc sophi: I'll try that
[13:47:32] louis_to jpmcc: try what
[13:47:34] louis_to ?
[13:47:38] louis_to create a list and invite them?
[13:47:42] CorNouws oops, AB members as non voting members to the cc, and meet when :-)
[13:48:01] CorNouws btw: where is Pavel
[13:48:06] louis_to ah, yes, him too
[13:48:12] jpmcc louis_to: I propose we invite the AB to nominate one member to attend the CC meetings - just as we have one CC representative on the AB
[13:48:20] * louis_to apologies to paveljanik in his absence
[13:49:13] CorNouws jpmcc: proposal AB repres. in CC meetings = OK for me
[13:49:57] louis_to in the interest of time--we need to discuss the WWDC funding among others, I propose we discuss this item on list and vote on it there or next meeting.
[13:50:52] sophi Just has an info from IBM that they want to sponsor the OOoCon with 15,000 USD (thanks stx12 :)
[13:51:08] CorNouws louis_to: about WWDC funding: didn't we agree on budgets and budget holders??
[13:51:28] louis_to CorNouws: we did, sort of.
[13:51:47] CorNouws louis_to: sort of? I thought we finished it :-)
[13:52:26] stx12 at least I remember so kind of form for requests :-)
[13:52:26] jpmcc OK, so we leave this to the budget holder for 'Developer' to decide?
[13:52:44] louis_to that's where I'm uncertain: is this a dev or marketing event?
[13:53:19] CorNouws the agenda suggests 'Other conferences' as well ;-)
[13:53:48] jpmcc "In previous years the WWDC has proved to be very helpful in allowing the Mac port to surge forward. It is hoped that with some extra help from the Apple developers this June, we will be able to make OpenOffice.org an even better application on Mac OS X" = Developer budget
[13:53:59] sophi louis_to: I think it's a dev event no ?
[13:54:04] louis_to fine with me
[13:54:07] mhu wrt agenda: what does "(cono)" mean?
[13:54:14] louis_to no idea
[13:54:25] CorNouws mhu: cono = cornouws ;-)
[13:54:40] mhu ah, thanks Cor
[13:55:17] louis_to then: regarding the wwdc and dev conferences, the developer budget head is the responsible here, and the wwdc peittion should be sent to him
[13:55:28] louis_to it must be acted on very quickly, btw
[13:55:51] jpmcc Is Eric still project lead?
[13:56:01] louis_to the budge heads must still identify their colleagues--adn for that, we need to publish the summary of last time's IRC discussion...
[13:56:08] louis_to jpmcc: no: shaun macdonald
[13:57:05] louis_to who is the dev budget holder?
[13:57:12] CorNouws louis_to: yes, pls publish the budgetting etc. so that we can easily point oithers i the right direction
[13:57:23] louis_to we need to appoint budget holders now.
[13:57:34] louis_to proposal: let's do it onlist by Friday evening.
[13:58:14] CorNouws didn't we do that already, linked to current function?
[13:58:16] louis_to the esc does the developer budget holder
[13:58:43] * _Nesshof_ needs to put it one next ESC meeting agenda
[13:58:44] stx12 mhu, _Nesshof_: when is the next esc meeting?
[13:58:47] louis_to not for developer...
[13:59:21] _Nesshof_ stx12: may be we should do next monday a ESC meeting
[13:59:29] _Nesshof_ stx12: last one is already overdue
[14:00:15] _Nesshof_ and it would be helpful to have consolidated CC meeting minutes with AIs
[14:00:17] louis_to can I suggest that one be held then?
[14:00:21] louis_to yes, I know
[14:00:30] * louis_to curses his laziness
[14:00:44] louis_to is coming today.
[14:01:04] louis_to so summary:
[14:01:07] _Nesshof_ louis_to: thanks
[14:01:26] _Nesshof_ will invite for ESC meeting March 31
[14:01:28] louis_to * ESC to hold meeting Monday on electing Budget Holder for Developer budget
[14:01:45] louis_to * WWDC petition will go that person. 
[14:02:00] louis_to Other dev. events also to be decided by him
[14:02:15] louis_to other points on this
[14:02:16] jpmcc I noticed Eric has blogged he is going to the Novell "alternative OOoConf" - if he asks for funding, I propose now we reject it ;-)
[14:02:16] louis_to ?
[14:02:47] louis_to I'd phrase it more neutrally:
[14:03:23] louis_to point out that our funds are limited to those events that aid the overall community
[14:03:47] * stx12 thinks of one-way tickets
[14:03:57] louis_to but it would be up to the dev budget (LOL) head...
[14:04:29] louis_to if nothing else on this topic I move we go on to OOoCon issues
[14:04:43] louis_to again, it's budget related.
[14:05:07] sophi all have you noticed my previous msg from Don : Please inform the CC in today's meeting at 15:30 UTC: IBM commits USD 15,000 to support OpenOffice.org CON 2008. 
[14:05:09] louis_to john, do you want to lead this part? it relates to your proposal to the list
[14:05:23] jpmcc sophi: Noted :-)
[14:05:30] jpmcc louis_to: ok
[14:05:31] sophi jpmcc: thanks :)
[14:05:59] louis_to sophi: I'll send Don and IBM a thanks and ensure that their contribution is recognized by that
[14:06:23] jpmcc Three proposals in my email. Can everyone give aa quick +-1 or comment...
[14:06:23] sophi louis_to: ok, thanks
[14:06:28] louis_to I should also hope that other stakeholders prove as generous...
[14:06:42] louis_to http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=1541
[14:06:47] * sophi too...
[14:07:05] jpmcc (2) we accept speakers proposals on a fortnightly basis rather than wait until the last minute - ok?
[14:07:31] louis_to +1 for the first part
[14:07:40] louis_to Notification immediate is good
[14:07:50] louis_to but the second... if stream is full: that is problematic
[14:08:27] louis_to if the deadline is still in effect, then we must accept papers until it expires
[14:08:33] louis_to that is the way the world works
[14:08:52] louis_to unless you are saying that once deadline has expired then we act fast.
[14:09:13] louis_to I'd suggest, rather, that if we have some people in mind, then we solicit papers from them
[14:09:53] louis_to so, item two: -1 from me, unless it is modified to read that it only comes into play after the expiry of the deadline
[14:10:01] louis_to ie, until after all papers are sent in
[14:10:17] mhu I think it is problematic accepting speakers on a "first come" vs. "best contrib" basis.
[14:10:21] stx12 i'm not sure whether "first come first serve" works here. 
[14:10:50] CorNouws so maybe three parts strategy: invite, accept supor quality direct, and evaluate the rest later?
[14:11:27] jpmcc I think it is rare for someone to suddenly have a brilliant idea for a paper in June...
[14:11:44] louis_to I would suggest we not implement #2 at all
[14:11:47] sophi jpmcc: no but not the time to write it may be
[14:11:48] jpmcc ...they just have been too lazy to think about it and get a proposal in before then (IMHO)
[14:12:01] louis_to jpmcc: I disagree....
[14:12:03] CorNouws jpmcc: no but not the time to write it may be
[14:12:09] louis_to many papers of high quality are sent in late
[14:12:20] sophi CorNouws: you copy me ;)
[14:12:21] louis_to but not by those needing confirmation for travel, to be sure
[14:12:29] jpmcc How long does it take to write a proposal? (not the whole paper)
[14:12:32] stx12 jpmcc: that might be correct; but we don't change this behaviour with the proposal
[14:12:32] CorNouws sophi: No, you typed faster ;-)
[14:13:13] CorNouws different direction: we think about early approving to make early booking possible?
[14:13:34] sophi jpmcc: it might take some time when you're not a native english speaker
[14:13:37] stx12 CorNouws: yes, that's why jpmcc pushes for early decisions
[14:13:38] jpmcc CorNouws: yes, and getting visas
[14:14:22] CorNouws so, then we should set  the deadline earlier
[14:14:33] CorNouws should / could
[14:14:34] sophi CorNouws: +1
[14:14:53] jpmcc We 'lost' speakers last year because they couldn't get visas in time / the flight costs had gone up too much
[14:15:42] louis_to then let's send out the CFP asap and shorten the deadline for "first call"
[14:15:55] mhu do we want to loose speakers just because they submit late (but before deadline) ?
[14:15:57] louis_to ie, have two calls: first and second. Second is guaranteed nothing, first a lot
[14:16:14] louis_to ie, have the first cutoff in May; the second June. 
[14:16:15] CorNouws louis_to: sounds good
[14:16:15] stx12 sounds good for me; is there a bad taste with extended CfPs?
[14:16:27] louis_to stx12; not from me. I live for them.
[14:16:32] jpmcc louis_to: as one of the worst offenders, which deadline will go for?
[14:16:43] louis_to early.
[14:16:55] louis_to and all who need cheap tix earlytoo
[14:16:58] louis_to early too/s
[14:17:20] jpmcc I would like to place a bet on Louis being very late ;-)
[14:17:23] louis_to :-)
[14:17:53] CorNouws jpmcc: het can copy the CC's year report and plan to present ;-)
[14:18:09] CorNouws het = he
[14:18:21] louis_to so, proposal: two deadlines, first in May (?) and second in June, with first open to more funding and speaking opportunities, the second no guarantees
[14:18:42] CorNouws + 1 (and tweak dates on list pls.)
[14:18:52] sophi +1
[14:19:07] _Nesshof_ +1
[14:19:07] jpmcc Early May +1 ;-)
[14:19:36] jpmcc OK, next proposal...
[14:19:52] louis_to hold on... are we all agreed? signify if you are not.
[14:20:01] stx12 +1
[14:20:08] mhu +1
[14:20:25] louis_to thx
[14:20:28] louis_to next proposal..
[14:20:30] CorNouws pls note my extension on Johns' #3: http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=1560
[14:20:43] * stx12 still thinks that number of to be accepted talks depends on number of tracks/slots/...
[14:21:51] jpmcc (3) We offer eur 500 funding plus hotel costs instead of refunding actual expenses incurred.
[14:22:46] jpmcc This was the original proposal from RF and I suggest we extend it to everyone.
[14:23:24] mhu I think, either fixed funding, or refundunging of expenses, but not a mix (fixed 500 + hotel costs).
[14:23:48] louis_to mhu: limits on hotel costs?
[14:23:51] jpmcc mhu: the hotel rooms will be block booked by RF
[14:24:01] stx12 mhu: it's easier for the local organizer to pay for all the rooms
[14:24:09] mhu what is RF ?
[14:24:12] stx12 redfalg
[14:24:33] jpmcc RF= the sun rising in the east :-)
[14:24:43] louis_to what about keynotes?
[14:24:52] CorNouws So RedFlag suggests: Speakers and we extend: developers in general
[14:24:55] mhu ah, thanks; so, team ooo to fund 500, plus redflag to fund hotel ?
[14:25:32] CorNouws mhu: No: RF has a budget, and we add to be able to support more developers to join
[14:25:56] louis_to I think the issue is we do not know the precise amount of the hotel cost to be incurred
[14:25:59] jpmcc RF have offered hotel + eur 500 for established community members and needy contributors (e.g. 3rd world). I suggest we add extra funding to include more people in the pot
[14:26:16] mhu as I said, either fixed funding, or fund of expenses; but not a mix.
[14:26:17] CorNouws jpmcc: +1
[14:26:25] louis_to I cannot see a strong argument agaisnt this, except that we do not know how many people this may amount to
[14:26:38] CorNouws mhu: fixed, I would say
[14:26:52] jpmcc mhu: it's a free hotel room (booked by RF and paid either by RF or us) + eur 500
[14:27:00] _Nesshof_ jpmcc: but we have funds of 0€ defined, spendings depends on sponsorings
[14:27:01] CorNouws louis_to: We can have a budget; finished = finished
[14:27:01] louis_to the number of tracks is undetermined (as is the date of the event) and so the damage could be high. But we can still estimate.
[14:27:22] mhu john, I don't want to pay a variable amount for hotel.
[14:27:27] CorNouws _Nesshof_: so we need to shift in our current budgets
[14:27:45] _Nesshof_ CorNouws: we have a reserve defined
[14:28:01] _Nesshof_ and we can raise this as soon as money comes in
[14:28:10] jpmcc mhu: if you were sponsored, you would only pay for your meals, mini-bar, and porno films in your room ;-)
[14:28:12] louis_to we can have, "up to X limit" either in total (for all) expense or indifvidual
[14:28:22] louis_to :-)
[14:28:23] _Nesshof_ but we need to define a limit now, but may raise that limite later
[14:28:34] CorNouws _Nesshof_: aren't we free to change if reaonable to existing commitments and for important goals ?
[14:28:41] mhu I'm serious, not joking.
[14:28:50] louis_to shall we ask peter junge?
[14:29:06] jpmcc louis_to: ask him what?
[14:29:21] louis_to rough estimate of hotel costs.
[14:29:23] * _Nesshof_ suggest a special OOoCon meeting to work out the details
[14:29:33] louis_to or clarify that we do not pay for the hotel costs, thus relieving us of that concern
[14:29:38] _Nesshof_ otherwise we will never get through our agenda now
[14:29:43] louis_to I agree
[14:29:56] stx12 to me it looks like we (the conference organizers) have to do some fund raising / seek for sponsors; earlier conferences lived from sponsorship (almost) alone
[14:30:04] CorNouws I propose that we do some work on list first (various questions can be read in the thread) and come back with that preparation next meeting ...
[14:30:12] louis_to +1
[14:30:24] sophi +1
[14:30:25] louis_to AI all of us on this
[14:30:38] louis_to (action item: AI)
[14:30:56] _Nesshof_ who will coordinate with peter j. to get a slot defined for a special OOo Con meeting ?
[14:30:56] louis_to # 4:
[14:31:03] jpmcc These items were proposed on the mailing list on 13th March and I got zero feedback. So please commit to joining in the discussion before moving on to the next agenda item (sulk)
[14:31:05] mhu Cor's proposal: +1
[14:31:17] louis_to _Nesshof_: I can contact him and cc ST and you
[14:31:34] louis_to #4 (4) I'd also like us to introduce registration fees (25 in advance
[14:31:34] louis_to  50 on the door?) this year to give us a better idea of numbers
[14:31:34] louis_to of  people who will actually attend. I'm hoping that one of the Advisory 
[14:31:34] louis_to Board members will be able to provide the infrastructure for collecting 
[14:31:34] louis_to international payments (Google Checkout?).
[14:31:39] sophi jpmcc: you got my +1
[14:31:53] _Nesshof_ jpmcc: +1
[14:32:26] _Nesshof_ jpmcc: but we need to agree with the exact amount of fee with the OOoCon team
[14:32:34] mhu jpmcc: commit to join discuss: +1
[14:32:37] louis_to _Nesshof_: we can discuss this on list
[14:32:41] CorNouws if handling the fees isn't too bothering : +1
[14:32:52] louis_to but +1
[14:33:07] mhu #4 -> +1
[14:33:31] stx12 +1 
[14:33:53] louis_to well, we are all agreed
[14:33:58] louis_to proposal passes
[14:33:58] stx12 who is going to contact sponsors about the infrastructure? 
[14:34:15] mhu except #3
[14:34:25] louis_to mhu: i meant #4
[14:34:33] louis_to # 2 also didn't pass
[14:34:38] jpmcc stx12: I will either directly or via sophi
[14:34:41] * stx12 think we only need this because it's asia; in europe we always have 300 attendees :_)
[14:34:55] sophi jpmcc: ok
[14:35:15] louis_to stx12: I don't know about that we had 600 registrants, at least, in Barc. but only 300 or so showed up; this made it very difficult to plan
[14:35:27] louis_to any other points?
[14:35:37] stx12 no, it's always 300 attendess; that's what i said
[14:35:44] louis_to if not, i'd like to raise a last one: When is OOoCon?
[14:35:55] louis_to stx12; my point was to limit number of spurious registrations....
[14:36:48] jpmcc Date: PJ is waiting to get a reply from our friends in Germany who are enjoying another holiday now (?)
[14:36:51] louis_to Lacking a firm date, it's hard to plan for hotels, venue, etc.
[14:36:51] stx12 i'm collecting feedback with the developers located in germany; i will have a summary for peter (and you) tomorrow
[14:36:58] louis_to stx12: thanks
[14:37:17] louis_to any other items?
[14:37:38] jpmcc Not for OOoConf tx
[14:37:50] louis_to if no, then I call the meeting adjourned. all agree?
[14:38:00] CorNouws louis_to: no
[14:38:11] CorNouws some more on our agenda
[14:38:16] louis_to CorNouws: like what?
[14:38:39] CorNouws Year plan /  Planning of next meetings
[14:39:00] louis_to ah. 
[14:39:31] jpmcc Proposal: every two weeks from today
[14:39:45] louis_to I would suggest we table that until next meeting. that year in review was begun by me and then continued, but has changed a little. 
[14:39:45] _Nesshof_ jpmcc: +1
[14:39:48] CorNouws jpmcc: No
[14:40:03] louis_to CorNouws?
[14:40:22] CorNouws louis_to: no proble to do year plan next meeting (or thereafter)
[14:40:43] CorNouws meetings: every second Thursday is - as you know - not ok for me
[14:41:16] CorNouws We had a nice thread on our cc list
[14:41:29] CorNouws may I pick that up and see if we come to a conclusion there?
[14:41:37] louis_to CorNouws: please
[14:41:44] CorNouws louis_to: thanks
[14:41:49] louis_to thanks
[14:42:01] louis_to so, if no other objections... I call the meeting adjourned. All agree?
[14:42:10] mhu so, when will be the next meeting, then?
[14:42:25] louis_to mhu: read the list....
[14:42:31] mhu no,...
[14:42:41] louis_to my guess is Tuesday or Wed., probably.
[14:42:44] CorNouws mhu: I'll contact you ASAP
[14:42:57] jpmcc Tuesday was the best day... 8th April?
[14:42:59] CorNouws Next meeting can be anounced tomorrow?
[14:43:10] mhu tuesday was not the best day.
[14:43:24] mhu tomorrow is fine with me.
[14:43:24] CorNouws mhu: I know, pls let? do it on the list, before monday
[14:43:38] CorNouws mhu: OK, thanks.
[14:43:53] louis_to yes, thanks
[14:44:03] _Nesshof_ maybe we should do reelections first ;-)
[14:44:08] louis_to :-)
[14:44:52] louis_to So.. once again.... "ditto"
[14:45:01] sophi louis_to: ok for me
[14:45:08] louis_to all in favour of ending now?
[14:45:15] mhu yes, bye.
[14:45:17] _Nesshof_ +1
[14:45:21] CorNouws Yes (But I wait untill all have left, before I miss something again ;-) )
[14:45:32] louis_to +1
<meeting adjourned>