- koski has joined
- koski has left
- Tobias has joined
- luca tagliaferri has joined
- luca tagliaferri has left
- Tobias has left
- koski has joined
- koski has left
- stpeter has joined
- stpeter has left
- stpeter has joined
- Tobias has joined
- Tobias has left
- Tobias has joined
- Tobias has left
- Florian has joined
- Tobias has joined
-
Florian
evening all :)
-
Kev
Evening.
-
Florian
I thought I've missed the meeeting .. but looks like I'm just in time :)
-
bear
Should be a fast meeting today - nothing on the agenda that I can see
- Florian is TimeZoneHopping
-
Florian
right :)
-
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.
-
bear
ick
-
Kev
So maybe another year.
-
stpeter
that's a shame
-
Kev
Say lah vee.
-
bear
meeting notes: http://typewith.me/TclFScASHi
-
bear
the only thing I have for the agenda is a question about team members and xsf membership
-
stpeter
gosh the websocket discussion list is killing my inbox...
- bear counts
-
bear
don't think we have a quorum yet
-
Florian
Couldn't send message: The service is unavailable when I try to contact Will
-
bear
I only have a question about some of the folks who did not reapply for xsf membership being on different teams
-
stpeter
I see Jack online
-
stpeter
sent him an invite
- Will has joined
-
Will
Hello
-
stpeter
hi Will!
-
bear
hi
-
Florian
hey Will
-
Will
Sorry, cycle to the train
-
Will
Station tool a little longer
-
Will
Took
-
stpeter
texting while cycling is dangerous
-
Will
Heh
-
bear
anything for the agenda?
- stpeter surfs to http://typewith.me/TclFScASHi
-
Florian
should we start?
-
bear
if my math is correct, we have a quoram
-
stpeter
math is good
- bear bangs the gavel
-
bear
agenda bashing?
-
Will
I have nothing
-
bear
currently I have for it a question: - are Comm/iTeam members required to be XSF members?
-
stpeter
Kev had a note about GSoC mentors meeting above
- bear adds
-
bear
ok, onward then
-
stpeter
well
-
stpeter
about the teams...
- bear pauses
-
Florian
my first guess would be ... iTeam .. not required
-
Florian
as it's not directly XSF
-
Kev
iTeam *is* XSF.
-
Florian
oh right
-
Kev
It's jabber.org that isn't.
-
Florian
BOFH isn't
-
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
-
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.
- Kev goes back to lurking.
-
Florian
ARTICLE VIII: XMPP Council; Special Interest Groups; XSF Work Teams
-
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
-
Florian
right
-
Will
I'm a commteam member and I'm not in the xsf
-
bear
it sounds like then, that I shouldn't open this can-o-worms :)
-
stpeter
or that people like Jerry can't help with Infrastructure issues because he's not an XSF member
-
stpeter
heh
-
stpeter
Will: you're always an outlier :P
-
Florian
:p
-
stpeter
I'm not calling you a lier, just an outlier ;-)
-
Will
I'm just "out there"
-
Florian
hehe
-
bear
so the answer then is "preferred, but not required"
-
Florian
yup, sounds good
-
Will
I think so
-
Florian
next item then?
-
stpeter
well, the Bylaws are clear: "Participation in Teams shall be limited to elected Members of the Corporation."
-
bear
ouch
-
Will
Im illegal!!
-
stpeter
so either change the bylaws or do things outside of the teams (e.g., just do stuff instead of having rules and regulations)
-
Kev
Which is what we do anyway.
-
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"
-
bear
sounds to me that we need to remove that part of the bylaw since in practice it is being ignored
-
stpeter
bear: I would agree
-
Florian
or amend it saying the preferred but not required
-
Florian
or amend it saying preferred but not required
-
stpeter
at the time, there was interest in having official teams
-
Will
"participation in teams shall be limited to jolly nice people"
-
Florian
:)
-
bear
or add wiggle text to allow team leaders to delegate to anyone
-
stpeter
mostly so that people could say "hey look, I'm the Official Chair of the XSF Marketing Team" and the like
-
bear
"at the discretion of the team leader, outside parties ...."
-
stpeter
but we don't even really have teams anymore
-
Kev
Apart from the iteam.
-
Will
Indeed
-
Florian
right
-
bear
we have 1.2 teams
-
stpeter
not in the sense of teams with members and leaders working on chartered projects approved by the Board -- that was the original impetus
-
bear
iteam + 2 folks who are not on the comm team who do things ;)
-
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
-
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 :)
-
bear
then we should change the bylaws to allow for team creation by the board w
-
bear
s/w//
-
Florian
+1
-
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."
-
bear
+1
-
Florian
+1
-
stpeter
so that's in the Bylaws now
-
stpeter
but we're not exactly chartering new work
- bear notes that stpeter is *good* at this stuff
-
stpeter
haha
-
Florian
:)
-
Will
Peter has a big brain
-
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."
-
bear
+1
-
Florian
+1
-
Will
That sounds reasonable cannot see any downsides +1
-
stpeter
Will: you *would* say that, as a non-member :P
-
Florian
lol
-
Will
I'm self serving
-
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)
-
Florian
sounds good
-
stpeter
ok, now that we've cleared that up...
-
bear
:)
-
Florian
I'm sorry to say, but I've got to run ...
-
bear
quick question if you can florian
-
Florian
sure
-
bear
kev's report - are they over budget for gsoc or for us?
-
bear
and by how much? if it's gsoc could we cover that difference?
-
stpeter
I think it's for GSoC
-
stpeter
since we don't have a budget for this :)
-
bear
good point
-
Florian
I'd support covering the difference
-
bear
my question then is would the board approve covering the difference
-
Florian
given it's not blowing our own budget :)
-
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!
-
Florian
stpeter: especially as Google will pay a part
-
Will
how much?
-
stpeter
right
-
stpeter
I don't remember how much Google pays for going to the summit
-
stpeter
perhaps they'd make an exception given that we've never sent anyone :)
-
Florian
:)
-
stpeter
but Kev would know
-
stpeter
so let's follow up with him
-
Florian
sounds good
-
bear
ok, we can follow up on this for next week
-
stpeter
I think the summit is in October, so we'll need to figure this out soonish
-
bear
*nod*
-
bear
with that I think we are done
-
stpeter
yes
-
Florian
ok :)
-
stpeter
nothing else here
-
bear
thanks all
-
Florian
great ... thanks all
-
Will
cool
-
Florian
gotta run
-
Florian
ttyl
-
stpeter
thanks, guys
-
stpeter
ciao Florian!
- Will has left
-
bear
any tweaks to the notes?
- stpeter looks
-
stpeter
yeah fine
- bear chuckles
-
stpeter
almost added Kev but he wasn't really here
-
bear
I sense that someone has editor fatigue
-
stpeter
thanks, bear
-
stpeter
heh
-
bear
k, i'll send the email
-
stpeter
super
-
stpeter
much appreciated
- stpeter goes back to voting
- stpeter votes against himself, as always :)
-
bear
hmm, suddenly I can't edit wiki pages :/
-
stpeter
hmm
-
stpeter
did you get logged out?
- luca tagliaferri has joined
-
bear
ahh -got timed out
-
bear
duh
-
stpeter
heh
-
stpeter
another episode of "When Smart People Do Dumb Things" :)
-
bear
lol
-
stpeter
I've done my fair share of those so far today :)
-
stpeter
ok, time to cook up some lunch here, bbiab
-
bear
ciao
- jack has joined
- jack has left
- luca tagliaferri has left
- Tobias has left
- Tobias has joined
- Tobias has left
-
Kev
Right, sorry.
-
Kev
Google's budget is $2000 for travel for two.
-
stpeter
ok
-
Kev
My estimates the other day were something like $2500 for the two of us.
-
stpeter
yeah that's not exactly priced right for coming from Europe
-
stpeter
damn Americans
-
Kev
Right.
-
Kev
If you get in early enough you can probably get flights for that much.
-
stpeter
$500 seems a small price to pay by the XSF
-
stpeter
given that we'll be receiving payment from Google anyway
-
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.
-
stpeter
's ok
-
Kev
Not wishing to appear ungrateful, as Google putting up the money is obviously great.
-
stpeter
heck, I'm almost tempted to go so we can have a book author reunion party ;-)
-
Kev
Just a lack of competence on my part into checking the small* print.
-
Kev
[*Not small]
-
stpeter
I think we'll be able to work it all out
-
Kev
I've not looked at the prices today, and I'm in the office tomorrow (and it's late now, etc. etc.)
- stpeter nods
-
stpeter
for sure
-
Kev
I'm very grateful to Board for the suggestion :)
-
stpeter
it was a stroke of brilliance
-
bear
yes, I am all for sending the three of you to the event
-
stpeter
actually I shan't go
-
stpeter
at least I don't think I would -- when is it exactly?
-
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.
-
bear
22 - 23 Oct
-
Kev
October the *mumble*
-
stpeter
hmm
-
bear
I think we could have gsoc send you two and just sponsor stpeter's trip
-
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
-
bear
google I don't think would refuse him admission
-
Kev
bear: I'm not sure that's true.
-
Kev
I *think* the waiting list is for everyone, because they have a limit on space in the (conferenceish) rooms.
-
bear
he's not going anyways - so my wishful thinking is just that
-
Kev
But I'm happy for Peter and Remko to go and me not :)
-
stpeter
I'm more likely to go next year if we participate, because I will be post-IETF at that point
-
Kev
:)
- bear has left
- bear has joined
- koski has joined
- koski has left
- Tobias has joined
- luca tagliaferri has joined
- luca tagliaferri has left
- Tobias has left
- koski has joined
- koski has left
- stpeter has joined
- stpeter has left
- stpeter has joined
- Tobias has joined
- Tobias has left
- Tobias has joined
- Tobias has left
- Florian has joined
- Tobias has joined
- Will has joined
- Will has left
- luca tagliaferri has joined
- jack has joined
- jack has left
- luca tagliaferri has left
- Tobias has left
- Tobias has joined
- Tobias has left
- bear has left
- bear has joined