XSF Discussion - 2011-08-24

  1. koski has joined

  2. koski has left

  3. Tobias has joined

  4. luca tagliaferri has joined

  5. luca tagliaferri has left

  6. Tobias has left

  7. koski has joined

  8. koski has left

  9. stpeter has joined

  10. stpeter has left

  11. stpeter has joined

  12. Tobias has joined

  13. Tobias has left

  14. Tobias has joined

  15. Tobias has left

  16. Florian has joined

  17. Tobias has joined

  18. Florian

    evening all :)

  19. Kev


  20. Florian

    I thought I've missed the meeeting .. but looks like I'm just in time :)

  21. bear

    Should be a fast meeting today - nothing on the agenda that I can see

  22. Florian is TimeZoneHopping

  23. Florian

    right :)

  24. Kev

    I may be out later, so I'll report now - it looks like it's not possible for Remko and me to get to the GSoC summit within budget, unfortunately.

  25. bear


  26. Kev

    So maybe another year.

  27. stpeter

    that's a shame

  28. Kev

    Say lah vee.

  29. bear

    meeting notes: http://typewith.me/TclFScASHi

  30. bear

    the only thing I have for the agenda is a question about team members and xsf membership

  31. stpeter

    gosh the websocket discussion list is killing my inbox...

  32. bear counts

  33. bear

    don't think we have a quorum yet

  34. Florian

    Couldn't send message: The service is unavailable when I try to contact Will

  35. bear

    I only have a question about some of the folks who did not reapply for xsf membership being on different teams

  36. stpeter

    I see Jack online

  37. stpeter

    sent him an invite

  38. Will has joined

  39. Will


  40. stpeter

    hi Will!

  41. bear


  42. Florian

    hey Will

  43. Will

    Sorry, cycle to the train

  44. Will

    Station tool a little longer

  45. Will


  46. stpeter

    texting while cycling is dangerous

  47. Will


  48. bear

    anything for the agenda?

  49. stpeter surfs to http://typewith.me/TclFScASHi

  50. Florian

    should we start?

  51. bear

    if my math is correct, we have a quoram

  52. stpeter

    math is good

  53. bear bangs the gavel

  54. bear

    agenda bashing?

  55. Will

    I have nothing

  56. bear

    currently I have for it a question: - are Comm/iTeam members required to be XSF members?

  57. stpeter

    Kev had a note about GSoC mentors meeting above

  58. bear adds

  59. bear

    ok, onward then

  60. stpeter


  61. stpeter

    about the teams...

  62. bear pauses

  63. Florian

    my first guess would be ... iTeam .. not required

  64. Florian

    as it's not directly XSF

  65. Kev

    iTeam *is* XSF.

  66. Florian

    oh right

  67. Kev

    It's jabber.org that isn't.

  68. Florian

    BOFH isn't

  69. stpeter

    we added the notion of teams to the bylaws some years ago when there was a lot of interest in making things more formal

  70. Kev

    And nominally you'd need to be XSF to be on the iTeam or CommTeam - but in practice we have people (Jerry) working on infrastructure who aren't members and we're not in a position to be turning away help.

  71. Kev goes back to lurking.

  72. Florian

    ARTICLE VIII: XMPP Council; Special Interest Groups; XSF Work Teams

  73. stpeter

    we can leave it as-is, but that doesn't mean (for example) that people can't help out with the website unless they're members of the XSF Communications Team

  74. Florian


  75. Will

    I'm a commteam member and I'm not in the xsf

  76. bear

    it sounds like then, that I shouldn't open this can-o-worms :)

  77. stpeter

    or that people like Jerry can't help with Infrastructure issues because he's not an XSF member

  78. stpeter


  79. stpeter

    Will: you're always an outlier :P

  80. Florian


  81. stpeter

    I'm not calling you a lier, just an outlier ;-)

  82. Will

    I'm just "out there"

  83. Florian


  84. bear

    so the answer then is "preferred, but not required"

  85. Florian

    yup, sounds good

  86. Will

    I think so

  87. Florian

    next item then?

  88. stpeter

    well, the Bylaws are clear: "Participation in Teams shall be limited to elected Members of the Corporation."

  89. bear


  90. Will

    Im illegal!!

  91. stpeter

    so either change the bylaws or do things outside of the teams (e.g., just do stuff instead of having rules and regulations)

  92. Kev

    Which is what we do anyway.

  93. stpeter

    "Bob is helping out with the website" vs. "Bob isn't an XSF member so therefore he can't be added to the XSF Communications Team"

  94. bear

    sounds to me that we need to remove that part of the bylaw since in practice it is being ignored

  95. stpeter

    bear: I would agree

  96. Florian

    or amend it saying the preferred but not required

  97. Florian

    or amend it saying preferred but not required

  98. stpeter

    at the time, there was interest in having official teams

  99. Will

    "participation in teams shall be limited to jolly nice people"

  100. Florian


  101. bear

    or add wiggle text to allow team leaders to delegate to anyone

  102. stpeter

    mostly so that people could say "hey look, I'm the Official Chair of the XSF Marketing Team" and the like

  103. bear

    "at the discretion of the team leader, outside parties ...."

  104. stpeter

    but we don't even really have teams anymore

  105. Kev

    Apart from the iteam.

  106. Will


  107. Florian


  108. bear

    we have 1.2 teams

  109. stpeter

    not in the sense of teams with members and leaders working on chartered projects approved by the Board -- that was the original impetus

  110. bear

    iteam + 2 folks who are not on the comm team who do things ;)

  111. stpeter

    if we had, say, a project to work on an XMPP Validator and the Board budgeted for that work and we felt we needed to organize it among the members, then we'd have need for a team

  112. stpeter

    but day-to-day things like maintaining the servers and posting to the website -- that's not a team thing, it's just stuff :)

  113. bear

    then we should change the bylaws to allow for team creation by the board w

  114. bear


  115. Florian


  116. stpeter

    as in "Each Team shall be responsible for the active management of one or more projects identified by resolution of the Board or of the Members of the Corporation as of importance to the affairs of the Corporation, or shall act in an advisory capacity to the Board or a Committee of the Board. The specific nature of the Team’s responsibilities shall be defined by a Team Charter, which must be approved by the Board."

  117. bear


  118. Florian


  119. stpeter

    so that's in the Bylaws now

  120. stpeter

    but we're not exactly chartering new work

  121. bear notes that stpeter is *good* at this stuff

  122. stpeter


  123. Florian


  124. Will

    Peter has a big brain

  125. stpeter

    so, we could modify the charter to remove "Participation in Teams shall be limited to elected Members of the Corporation." and then the existing text covers it: "The Charter shall also define the process by which Team members shall be chosen or approved."

  126. bear


  127. Florian


  128. Will

    That sounds reasonable cannot see any downsides +1

  129. stpeter

    Will: you *would* say that, as a non-member :P

  130. Florian


  131. Will

    I'm self serving

  132. stpeter

    ok, so we can bring that change to the membership during the next voting period (not the current one on members since that's underway, speaking of which I need to vote)

  133. Florian

    sounds good

  134. stpeter

    ok, now that we've cleared that up...

  135. bear


  136. Florian

    I'm sorry to say, but I've got to run ...

  137. bear

    quick question if you can florian

  138. Florian


  139. bear

    kev's report - are they over budget for gsoc or for us?

  140. bear

    and by how much? if it's gsoc could we cover that difference?

  141. stpeter

    I think it's for GSoC

  142. stpeter

    since we don't have a budget for this :)

  143. bear

    good point

  144. Florian

    I'd support covering the difference

  145. bear

    my question then is would the board approve covering the difference

  146. Florian

    given it's not blowing our own budget :)

  147. stpeter

    however, we have only $10k in the bank, however I doubt that it was going to cost that much to send two people to California for a few days!

  148. Florian

    stpeter: especially as Google will pay a part

  149. Will

    how much?

  150. stpeter


  151. stpeter

    I don't remember how much Google pays for going to the summit

  152. stpeter

    perhaps they'd make an exception given that we've never sent anyone :)

  153. Florian


  154. stpeter

    but Kev would know

  155. stpeter

    so let's follow up with him

  156. Florian

    sounds good

  157. bear

    ok, we can follow up on this for next week

  158. stpeter

    I think the summit is in October, so we'll need to figure this out soonish

  159. bear


  160. bear

    with that I think we are done

  161. stpeter


  162. Florian

    ok :)

  163. stpeter

    nothing else here

  164. bear

    thanks all

  165. Florian

    great ... thanks all

  166. Will


  167. Florian

    gotta run

  168. Florian


  169. stpeter

    thanks, guys

  170. stpeter

    ciao Florian!

  171. Will has left

  172. bear

    any tweaks to the notes?

  173. stpeter looks

  174. stpeter

    yeah fine

  175. bear chuckles

  176. stpeter

    almost added Kev but he wasn't really here

  177. bear

    I sense that someone has editor fatigue

  178. stpeter

    thanks, bear

  179. stpeter


  180. bear

    k, i'll send the email

  181. stpeter


  182. stpeter

    much appreciated

  183. stpeter goes back to voting

  184. stpeter votes against himself, as always :)

  185. bear

    hmm, suddenly I can't edit wiki pages :/

  186. stpeter


  187. stpeter

    did you get logged out?

  188. luca tagliaferri has joined

  189. bear

    ahh -got timed out

  190. bear


  191. stpeter


  192. stpeter

    another episode of "When Smart People Do Dumb Things" :)

  193. bear


  194. stpeter

    I've done my fair share of those so far today :)

  195. stpeter

    ok, time to cook up some lunch here, bbiab

  196. bear


  197. jack has joined

  198. jack has left

  199. luca tagliaferri has left

  200. Tobias has left

  201. Tobias has joined

  202. Tobias has left

  203. Kev

    Right, sorry.

  204. Kev

    Google's budget is $2000 for travel for two.

  205. stpeter


  206. Kev

    My estimates the other day were something like $2500 for the two of us.

  207. stpeter

    yeah that's not exactly priced right for coming from Europe

  208. stpeter

    damn Americans

  209. Kev


  210. Kev

    If you get in early enough you can probably get flights for that much.

  211. stpeter

    $500 seems a small price to pay by the XSF

  212. stpeter

    given that we'll be receiving payment from Google anyway

  213. Kev

    I'd not appreciated the budget was quite that low, or I might have gotten stuff done earlier, and if Remko had realised he'd have poked me into doing something.

  214. stpeter

    's ok

  215. Kev

    Not wishing to appear ungrateful, as Google putting up the money is obviously great.

  216. stpeter

    heck, I'm almost tempted to go so we can have a book author reunion party ;-)

  217. Kev

    Just a lack of competence on my part into checking the small* print.

  218. Kev

    [*Not small]

  219. stpeter

    I think we'll be able to work it all out

  220. Kev

    I've not looked at the prices today, and I'm in the office tomorrow (and it's late now, etc. etc.)

  221. stpeter nods

  222. stpeter

    for sure

  223. Kev

    I'm very grateful to Board for the suggestion :)

  224. stpeter

    it was a stroke of brilliance

  225. bear

    yes, I am all for sending the three of you to the event

  226. stpeter

    actually I shan't go

  227. stpeter

    at least I don't think I would -- when is it exactly?

  228. Kev

    There's an automatic allocation of two people, with a waiting list for extras - I'm happy to give up my seat to send Peter instead.

  229. bear

    22 - 23 Oct

  230. Kev

    October the *mumble*

  231. stpeter


  232. bear

    I think we could have gsoc send you two and just sponsor stpeter's trip

  233. stpeter

    yeah I need to go to the W3C Plenary meetings the week of October 31 and then Taipei for IETF 82 the week of November 13 -- that's enough for me

  234. bear

    google I don't think would refuse him admission

  235. Kev

    bear: I'm not sure that's true.

  236. Kev

    I *think* the waiting list is for everyone, because they have a limit on space in the (conferenceish) rooms.

  237. bear

    he's not going anyways - so my wishful thinking is just that

  238. Kev

    But I'm happy for Peter and Remko to go and me not :)

  239. stpeter

    I'm more likely to go next year if we participate, because I will be post-IETF at that point

  240. Kev


  241. bear has left

  242. bear has joined