(17:47:35) Thalion72: ok - but I'd suggest we don't vote here at IRC ut call for a vote on the mailing list. (We have only 4 out of 9 members here)
(17:48:09) CorNouws: Thalion72: 4 out of 9 is too few - I agree
(17:49:59) Thalion72: hmm .. so let's try to go through the agenda? and maybe discuss some points
(17:52:36) CorNouws: ok ok ok
(17:54:28) Thalion72: CorNouws: was you put the agenda together (thanks btw.) could you lead the discusion?
(17:55:38) CorNouws: ok for me.
(17:55:47) Thalion72: thanks
(17:56:14) CorNouws: So lets start then. Welcome on this meeting all.
(17:56:34) CorNouws: Any remarks on the agenda itself?
(17:57:09) CorNouws: If no, the minutes of the meeting of July 24
(17:58:12) CorNouws: Any remarks on these?
(17:58:29) Thalion72: no
(17:58:48) sophi: no
(17:58:52) _Nesshof_: no
(17:59:08) CorNouws: OK then. Thanks to André and Sophie for making them
(17:59:33) CorNouws: Actions from previous meeting
(17:59:47) sophi: CorNouws: I'll make them also for today
(17:59:57) CorNouws: Community year plan - now on the wiki http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Council/Items/YearPlan
(18:00:36) Thalion72: ah - great . you put the edit-link to the agenda (by intetnion? :) )
(18:01:33) CorNouws: Thalion72: OT: No I didn't. If I edit it, it's not there either. So a wiki-bug ?
(18:02:28) CorNouws: The idea is that now details for the various items are set up.
(18:02:56) CorNouws: Can all imagine where that should lead to?
(18:03:39) Thalion72: I have at least an idea :)
(18:03:50) sophi: me too :)
(18:06:18) CorNouws: I see a potential problem ..
(18:06:26) Thalion72: which one?
(18:06:50) CorNouws: If we want the plans on the items to be SMART with the R of realistic ...
(18:07:53) CorNouws: then the idea that a few have to pull at all the others in the cc is not that attractive
(18:07:54) sophi: CorNouws: well realistic didn't mean in the minute, it may take month too :)
(18:09:04) Thalion72: hmm .. I see the point. If you first need to attract all the other peole, it will be disattracting for the one in charge
(18:09:27) CorNouws: sophi: that is true. but we have to realize that - how things go now - it takes much time to get things on the move
(18:09:44) CorNouws: Thalion72: experience .. ;)
(18:09:53) Thalion72: yes :)
(18:09:55) sophi: CorNouws: yes, I agree
(18:10:18) Thalion72: CorNouws: maybe we should try to see, on what are we shoulod work first
(18:10:30) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: Marint: do you share our concerns ?
(18:10:54) Thalion72: this would be identified by a combination of "most important" / "most attracting for participation"
(18:12:09) _Nesshof_: CorNouws: ihmo we should try to push the real work into work groups, this can include work of non CC members
(18:12:27) _Nesshof_: and we already prooved, that we as CC are not able to do that work
(18:13:10) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: the real work is the realization, once the plans are set up?
(18:13:20) _Nesshof_: CorNouws: yes
(18:13:36) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: ok, sharing that will help
(18:13:53) CorNouws: And working on the plans of the items, we can start by the Specific, Measureable, Acceptable
(18:14:08) CorNouws: ... and fill in the M & T as last two points
(18:14:36) CorNouws: By that time it will become clear what extra people we need for the jobs
(18:14:51) CorNouws: 'jobs' might reed: 'work'
(18:15:54) CorNouws: So, is it a good idea, that we start to work on the SMA details for the next meeting?
(18:16:13) Thalion72: sounds reasonable
(18:16:43) CorNouws: maybe a round by mail, to find out which cc-member likes to work on which item (in this stage)?
(18:17:32) Thalion72: I'd guess it would be more helpfull to assign the items - but asking would be fair
(18:18:26) CorNouws: Anyone that does not reply, will get one assigned :-) I'm afraid that will not boost productivty :-\
(18:18:38) CorNouws: Can all agree with this little step forward?
(18:18:46) sophi: CorNouws: yes, I'm afraid also
(18:19:28) sophi: CorNouws: I already know on what I'll work :)
(18:20:32) Thalion72: CorNouws: yes - +1 for finding out, who is willing to work on what item
(18:20:48) Thalion72: (dont forget to ask for an estimated time line)
(18:21:08) CorNouws: OK, IÄºl send out an mail with explanation and request
(18:21:18) sophi: CorNouws: ok, thank you
(18:21:26) CorNouws: thanks for the ideas all.
(18:21:30) CorNouws: OK, next point then
(18:21:40) CorNouws: The role of the AB in OOo
(18:21:50) CorNouws: Now that Pavel (by mail) admitted the existence of an AB, we can continue ..
(18:22:00) sophi: CorNouws: yes ;)
(18:22:37) Thalion72: sophi: just - I know, you spent a lot of your time on this issue. But in general I second PAvel.
(18:22:45) Thalion72: hope, you don't take this personal
(18:23:06) CorNouws: sophi: would it help if we correspond about the next draft?
(18:23:14) sophi: Thalion72: no, no problem, but for me if we admitted its existence once, we should raise our concerns to ti
(18:24:00) sophi: Thalion72: if the AB is dead for us, ok, but we need to tell the AB that we won't spend any time in the future
(18:24:37) _Nesshof_: sophi: I see it this way: there is no direct connection between AB and CC (or community)
(18:25:02) CorNouws: I strongly encourage to make steps. Even small slow steps still are steps.
(18:25:21) _Nesshof_: AB is a separate meeting where people talk, which contribute some working resources to the project
(18:26:04) _Nesshof_: so they have influence, but I don't think they ever will discuss about content
(18:26:46) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: I don't have the logs of previous meetings at hand, but is there a change in your idea on this subject?
(18:26:51) sophi: _Nesshof_: ok, I agree, but it must be clearly said by the AB, the charter was not reflecting that
(18:28:24) Thalion72: hmm - we are running in circles :(
(18:28:43) _Nesshof_: CorNouws: no
(18:29:09) Thalion72: either we accept, that the AB has influence on the OOo product / community - in this case we should ask the AB to define it's role
(18:29:53) CorNouws: The previous meeting we agreed to send out a letter, based on prior discussion
(18:30:00) Thalion72: or we ignore the AB as it has no direct influence on the community (only through contributions or - as pavel suggested - through advicing Sun)
(18:30:11) CorNouws: Has anything changed, so that we should change that decission?
(18:30:40) Thalion72: CorNouws: the draft was never approvd (due to comments that were never followed by better sugestions)
(18:30:45) CorNouws: If not: I propose to work with sopie on a realistinc letter.
(18:31:10) CorNouws: Thalion72: ok, final version needs approval.
(18:31:15) Thalion72: CorNouws: Sophi and John have a relaistic letter ready to send out (imho)
(18:31:41) Thalion72: but those who had critics never made better suggestions
(18:31:59) CorNouws: sophi: my idea was that some editing was still needed. Is that correct?
(18:32:00) sophi: yes, we can make it more simple, Does that AB has any plans for the future concerning the community ?
(18:32:12) CorNouws: Thalion72: and if better suggestions lack, we just try ou best
(18:32:48) sophi: CorNouws: no, this is the lack of feedback, editing was made by John
(18:32:52) Thalion72: CorNouws: we cannot - if we like to follow our charter (you know - consensus vote )
(18:33:07) CorNouws: OK; for now I propose: Sophie and Cor work on the next , possibly final, version of the letter
(18:33:22) CorNouws: Thalion72: we can, if all agree on the last proposal.
(18:33:49) sophi: CorNouws: ok, for me, I'll send you back the last draft.
(18:33:55) Thalion72: CorNouws: as said - there have been negative votes on the proposal
(18:34:23) Thalion72: and no better sugestions by those who casted a negative vote
(18:34:43) CorNouws: Thalion72: then how is it possible that we dicided to make a final version to be send out?
(18:35:09) sophi: CorNouws: this is why I didn't sent again anything for the moment
(18:35:55) Thalion72: we did not yet agree on sending out a given text
(18:36:12) Thalion72: we only agreed that we should send out "something yet to be written"
(18:36:24) CorNouws: Thalion72: yes, that was clear ;)
(18:36:28) CorNouws: so for the moment we can do nothing and put it back on the agenda for next meeting?
(18:36:43) CorNouws: ok?
(18:36:54) sophi: CorNouws: I'll prepare something else, more simple as I said
(18:37:09) CorNouws: sophi: thanks!
(18:37:21) Thalion72: sophi: thanks - hope, this would work
(18:37:35) CorNouws: no responce is agreement, so we can move on?
(18:37:40) ***sophi has learned patience since some years ;)
(18:38:18) Thalion72: yes, please move on
(18:38:36) CorNouws: ok
(18:38:38) CorNouws: Work on modifications of the CC charter
(18:39:24) Thalion72: current draft is at the wiki
(18:39:25) sophi: Thalion72: thanks for the work on that :)
(18:39:32) CorNouws: Did all have a look at the wiki: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Items/Charter_Proposal
(18:39:46) ***Thalion72 had a look ;)
(18:39:57) _Nesshof_: yes
(18:40:30) CorNouws: many thanks André.
(18:40:42) CorNouws: I did not follow every detail of the discussion, but find the current draft pretty good.
(18:40:55) Thalion72: ok . thanks
(18:41:17) Thalion72: the problem is, that there are not so many contributions to the "core discussion"
(18:41:26) Thalion72: discussions tends to drift away.
(18:42:09) Thalion72: at the moment I'm not sure about the the idea to have an electorate based on cvs commits - if this would be fair to code submitters
(18:42:11) CorNouws: Thalion72: I noticed. Even greater achievement to see what you made out of it!
(18:42:48) sophi: Thalion72: may be we should bring that discussion on the core dev and others non core dev projects on the dev@list to get feedback?
(18:42:57) CorNouws: Thalion72: an electorate based on cvs ...
(18:43:18) CorNouws: I doubt if the last details on this point are the most important
(18:43:52) CorNouws: I think a procedure (attention, discussion or whatever) during elections are more important to get the best candidates for the cc
(18:43:55) sophi: Thalion72: this is a major concern for our project, we really need to know who are our contributors in the whole project
(18:44:41) Thalion72: CorNouws: I think the same - but in this case I accept MMeek's concerns
(18:45:12) CorNouws: Thalion72: have to read agina what MM's concerns are
(18:45:27) CorNouws: agina = again
(18:45:55) CorNouws: So this oint might need atra attention
(18:45:55) Thalion72: CorNouws: the point is, that active code contributors are not having influence on the project ATM
(18:46:51) _Nesshof_: Thalion72: that's the point, I really doubt that
(18:46:58) Thalion72: yes - but as I'm not subscribed to dev@ooo, I'd rather have someone els to bring the discussion there
(18:47:05) CorNouws: Thalion72: Yes, I did understand that. But isn' t that handled in the current proposal?
(18:47:27) Thalion72: _Nesshof_: you doubt what? That cde contributors are misrepresented atm?
(18:48:13) _Nesshof_: From my experience code contributors are only interested in politic discussion to a certain level
(18:48:15) Thalion72: CorNouws: no - not really. MMeeks brought the idea to dereive the electorate from cvs commits - but I'm not sure, if this would be fair
(18:48:55) _Nesshof_: only 1-2 % of code developers want to dive into deep discussion which are not related to source code
(18:49:18) CorNouws: Thalion72: ok, so "an electorate based on cvs ..." needs extra attention/ discussion
(18:49:18) _Nesshof_: or have the time to take over additionatial work beside programming
(18:49:48) Thalion72: _Nesshof_: I have the same impression / experience - but like to see this verified
(18:50:06) _Nesshof_: Thalion72: how
(18:50:10) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: can we have that discusion on mail in order to further draft the poposal on the wiki?
(18:50:19) Thalion72: _Nesshof_: could you ask this at ESC (I'd expect more tdevelopers there)
(18:50:40) Thalion72: CorNouws: yes, I can request help on the topic via mail - no problem
(18:50:48) _Nesshof_: Thalion72: I also doubt that the esc is the right forum for this
(18:51:06) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: are you willing to help the discussion there?
(18:51:21) _Nesshof_: CorNouws: there ?
(18:51:37) _Nesshof_: dev@ooo ?
(18:52:00) Thalion72: whatever the "right forum" would be.
(18:52:07) _Nesshof_: Thalion72: ok
(18:52:12) CorNouws: willing = able :-) there is on the mailing list, maybe for this item dev@OOo is best yes
(18:52:28) CorNouws: ok, thanks.
(18:52:44) Thalion72: _Nesshof_: thanks!
(18:52:58) CorNouws: Other points that need extra attention before we can vote on the draft?
(18:53:19) Thalion72: CorNouws: hmm .. no special attention, but it will still need some rework
(18:53:45) Thalion72: I'll do this within the next weeks (jopefully be ready for the next meeting)
(18:54:10) CorNouws: I also have to read it once more and let it rest for a moment. But have a very positive inpression.
(18:54:18) Thalion72: Comments are welcome - as long as I do not get any comments, I'll go on with my (strange) ideas ;)
(18:54:26) CorNouws: do martin and Sophie also think we are heading in the right direction?
(18:54:47) sophi: Thalion72: I've made some comments by mail on the cc list
(18:55:21) sophi: CorNouws: yes, I think it's good :)
(18:55:31) ***_Nesshof_ is not sure
(18:55:40) Thalion72: sophi: yes, I've seen it
(18:56:11) CorNouws: Any items (apart from the discussion about dev - representatives) you can share right now?
(18:56:27) CorNouws: (question for Martin, of course)
(18:57:15) _Nesshof_: I'm not sure if all of this really helps to improve the situation
(18:57:40) Thalion72: _Nesshof_: neither am I
(18:57:43) ***_Nesshof_ would like to do some face2face brainstorming about this to come to new/better ideas
(18:58:07) Thalion72: the only thing I'm sure about is, that cannot get worse - and that we need to change the situation
(18:58:09) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: yes pls. Any poposal when/where?
(18:58:19) _Nesshof_: Thalion72: agreed
(18:58:54) _Nesshof_: CorNouws: and who ?
(18:59:08) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: well, cc to start with?
(18:59:41) ***_Nesshof_ is afraid that with the whole CC we cant find a date for such meeting
(19:00:09) ***Thalion72 suggests a subset of (intrested) council members
(19:00:16) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: share that concenr, but we can try to find the best time for the most people?
(19:00:31) Thalion72: + (maybe) one "external" advisor
(19:00:44) CorNouws: may I conclude (time is running) a + b:
(19:01:01) _Nesshof_: or, should we should meet at a weekend or within the week ?
(19:01:21) CorNouws: a = we continue on the current proposal (since the work is partly supported by community mebers thus important)
(19:01:46) CorNouws: b = we discuss on discuss@council about a meeting
(19:02:02) Thalion72: CorNouws: +1 for both
(19:02:15) sophi: CorNouws: +1 for both
(19:02:24) _Nesshof_: CorNouws: +1 for both
(19:02:37) Thalion72: (when satrting to work on the draft this was my idea anyway- that we need more structural changes in the council)
(19:02:44) CorNouws: thanks all!
(19:02:44) CorNouws: next item of the agenda
(19:02:50) CorNouws: Thalion72: ()
(19:02:59) CorNouws: Infrastructure budget
(19:03:05) CorNouws: Positive replies from Florian Effenberger and Christian Lohmaier
(19:03:11) CorNouws: So I propose a +1
(19:03:27) _Nesshof_: +1 for that proposal !
(19:03:43) CorNouws: _Nesshof_: ;-)
(19:04:13) Thalion72: +1 (but we should call for all votes at the mailing list)
(19:05:01) CorNouws: sophi: ?
(19:05:07) sophi: all, I need to give his supper to my grand son, sorry and see you later
(19:05:14) sophi: + 1
(19:05:36) CorNouws: sophi: have a noce meal to. I think most of the agenda is ready now
(19:05:47) CorNouws: no poposals from Louis
(19:06:02) CorNouws: and no news - that O know of - from the OOoCon
(19:06:25) paveljanik [n=Pavel@unaffiliated/paveljanik] is de ruimte binnengekomen.
(19:06:41) paveljanik: Hi
(19:06:42) _Nesshof_: hi pavel
(19:06:59) paveljanik: Do we have a log from the meeting?
(19:07:01) CorNouws: Hi pavel
(19:07:34) Thalion72: paveljanik: not yet - meeting is still open
(19:07:56) CorNouws: paveljanik: we're close to the end, I save a log (and others do as well?)
(19:08:27) CorNouws: About the OOoCon: who from the cc already know they will join?
(19:08:39) paveljanik: ah
(19:08:39) paveljanik: brko wrote me he can't join in.
(19:08:42) Thalion72: I'll join
(19:09:16) CorNouws: paveljanik: great you are able to make it any way!
(19:09:25) Thalion72: (but don't know, if I still will be council member ;) )
(19:09:37) _Nesshof_: me too
(19:10:25) CorNouws: I hope to, but have to cope with some tough stuff here, so yet unsure, alas
(19:10:58) CorNouws: ok, anything else for this meeting?
(19:11:19) Thalion72: not from my side
(19:11:29) _Nesshof_: no
(19:11:40) CorNouws: Thalion72: Thanks for your mailt to Louis, if I may say so.
(19:11:49) CorNouws: Thalion72: (Think I have to become Sun employe as well. He missed about three or four meetings due to vacation ;) )
(19:12:09) Thalion72: :)
(19:12:21) CorNouws: Anyone volunteering for the minutes?
(19:12:30) Thalion72: CorNouws: will you post the log to the wiki?
(19:12:43) Thalion72: Sophi already volunteered fror the minutes
(19:12:52) CorNouws: Thalion72: Yes, I'll do so
(19:12:59) CorNouws: Thanks to Sophie
(19:13:16) CorNouws: That's all for now. Thanks for the discussion and ideas etc.
(19:13:29) CorNouws: Hope to see you and many more in two weeks!
(19:13:35) Thalion72: Thanks!
(19:13:44) paveljanik: I won't be in China.
(19:14:25) Thalion72: paveljanik: are you going to join the regional meeting in Bolzano?
(19:15:33) paveljanik: unfortunately no.
(19:15:33) paveljanik: the reason to both no is different though
(19:15:33) paveljanik: 8(
(19:15:52) CorNouws: Have to leave now. Bye all
(19:15:58) _Nesshof_: by
(19:15:59) Thalion72: Bye!