19:01:50 #startmeeting 19:01:50 Meeting started Wed Feb 9 19:01:50 2011 UTC. The chair is henne. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:01:50 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 19:01:51 suseROCKs: wakey wakey 19:01:58 mrdocs: hola 19:02:02 #meetingtopic openSUSE Board Meeting 19:02:20 prusnak, yawny yawny 19:02:51 #chair prusnak suseROCKs AlanClark mrdocsosx rhorstkoetter 19:02:51 Warning: Nick not in channel: rhorstkoetter 19:02:51 Current chairs: AlanClark henne mrdocsosx prusnak rhorstkoetter suseROCKs 19:03:02 * suseROCKs snorts 19:03:10 aufwischen! 19:03:19 okay here we go 19:03:21 sandwiches 19:03:25 the agenda for this meeting is 19:03:50 1. Introduction of new board members 19:03:50 2. Discussion of new meeting times and joining -project meetings 19:03:50 3. Review of communication with open-SLX 19:03:50 4. Review Action Items assigned at previous board meetings 19:03:50 5. openSUSE Strategy 19:03:53 1. Board review and action due when? 19:03:55 2. next steps? 19:03:58 6. Bugzilla setup for tracking Board AI 19:04:00 7. openSUSE Foundation 19:04:03 1. To bring focus, topics have been created and a moderator has been assigned to guide each topic. Board members are currently assigned as topic moderators as they have the information from the prior discussions. 19:04:07 2. Topics listed as "Data gathering in progress" 19:04:09 1. Historical Data - suseROCKS from the Jan 26 mtg has the AI to gather the historical data. Bugzilla id=670598 19:04:12 3. The topics currently listed as open for discussion are: 19:04:15 1. Objective of the Foundation - Henne took an AI from the last meeting to drive this topic. 19:04:18 2. Copyrights and Trademarks - Topic is open for updates to the existing policy 19:04:22 3. Financial Accounting - Topic is now open for mailing list discussions 19:04:25 8. Where do we need to improve? 19:04:28 9. Questions & Answers 19:04:30 i hope you have nothing else planed for tonight ;) 19:04:33 lets roll 19:04:35 #topic Introduction of new board members 19:04:39 Fortunately, we have a very light agenda today and can get on with our lives 19:04:43 * henne eys mrdocsosx 19:05:08 lets make this easy 19:05:12 ok actually is here? 19:05:15 who doesn't know peter? :) 19:05:21 who? 19:06:08 mrdocs take a bow 19:06:29 okay, so let's warmly invite peter to our secret circle 19:06:38 can i have a round of applause?! 19:06:50 do we still use the paddles for initiations? Can't remember if we abolished that yet 19:06:50 * henne claps 19:07:02 * henne slaps 19:07:24 i guess that should do 19:07:39 can someone page him? I don't thhink he intended to miss thefirst meeting and maybe just lost track of time 19:07:44 I would hate for him to miss this meeting 19:08:37 * henne writes an sms 19:08:40 i am writing him an sms 19:09:11 whatever happened to good old fashioned phone calls? :-/ 19:09:41 they were replaced in the 80s by sms 19:09:42 phone calls were never free here in europe, you know 19:10:27 sms in the 80's? 19:10:59 anyway 19:11:07 maybe we can go for #2 until he joins us 19:11:08 lets skip ahead to the action items 19:11:14 as he is not involved in that one yet 19:11:27 ah, right, that's better :) 19:11:28 #2 requires also his presence 19:11:33 lets do #4 19:11:37 yes, i realised that just now 19:12:00 action items are at: http://bit.ly/opensuse_board_ais 19:12:06 #topic Review Action Items 19:12:19 * mrdocs waves... 19:12:19 the action items are where pavol said 19:12:27 http://bit.ly/opensuse_board_ais 19:12:30 oh sure NOW he shows up! :-) 19:12:45 i transfered what i found in the meeting logs from up to back in september 19:12:58 and some general things i remembered 19:13:00 is that why I got slammed with bugzilla mails this morning? :-D 19:13:17 yes it was 19:13:24 so lets discuss the status of things 19:13:31 suseROCKs: a mild flood compared to my inbox :) 19:13:33 "Dig out the records of the foundation discussion" is really old now, how about making that less work ? I mean, there's probably no point in digging out all the old stuff 19:14:01 that is bug #670598 19:14:04 openSUSE bug 670598 in openSUSE.org (Board) "Dig out the records of the foundation discussion" [Normal,New] https://bugzilla.novell.com/670598 19:14:06 I tend to agree. I think we've gone in such different directions lately that digging up old no longer is relevant 19:14:10 the current state of things, and why, should certainly be enough to start the discussion 19:14:16 I would second that we pull out what is needed as we go along 19:14:17 and to prevent people from starting it all over again 19:14:52 I'm also more concerned with whether we should be publishing a foundation direction article either, since we've clearly seen so much FUD going around 19:15:21 can we please stay on topic? :) 19:15:28 there's a new round of fud attacking Alan these days btw. really a rehash of the existing fud 19:15:31 so what about that AI? 19:15:35 should we close it? 19:15:36 henne, they're related! 19:15:47 everything is related 19:15:55 relatively so :-) 19:16:05 we will never get through AIs if we discuss everything related 19:16:06 I'm agreeing with AlanClark and yaloki that we should close this AI 19:16:07 please 19:16:12 +1 19:16:12 okay then its closed 19:16:33 what about the announcement of the process? 19:16:36 Bug #670594 19:16:40 openSUSE bug 670594 in openSUSE.org (Board) "Write an announcement about the new process of creating the foundation." [Critical,New] https://bugzilla.novell.com/670594 19:17:08 so since we're now on the related topic :-D 19:17:11 i'll take that if it is not an immediate deadline 19:17:12 With the last one now closed, I will work on the announcement and have it for your review by Friday. 19:17:23 fine then 19:17:38 do we need an annoucnement? Seems the foundation list is pretty active as it is 19:17:57 yes to raise visibility 19:18:03 outside of the community 19:18:08 and its not nearly as active as it needs to be 19:18:13 if we want to pull off an foundation 19:18:15 * mrdocs nods 19:18:21 * prusnak agrees 19:18:24 we've all been sidetracked 19:18:28 only 4 people participated 19:18:32 ok 19:18:37 but with some good comments 19:18:38 ive been reading mostly... 19:18:43 I would suggest to try to explain why it is important to everyone 19:18:50 exactly 19:18:52 as I presume that 99% of people just think it's useless 19:18:58 (just like blogging, or being nice, or ...) 19:19:02 AlanClark: true. but we do this to attract people that do the work afterwards, remember? :) 19:19:06 I would also suggest if we do it, we explain that this is a community initiative, not a Novell initiative 19:19:16 no they just do not see it directly benefiting themselves 19:19:17 because that FUD is making its second round this week 19:19:21 yaloki: shut up you twat. being nice is useless! ;) 19:19:28 lol 19:19:35 henne: yes coolo ! 19:19:38 err henne ! 19:19:39 coolo: :D 19:19:55 everyone's reposting a techrights article right now that the board members are under the control of AlanClark Which frankly, infuriates me 19:20:05 haha 19:20:07 techrights == royboy 19:20:12 dudes 19:20:16 like i control suseROCKS or henne 19:20:27 don't bother royboy, it's pointless 19:20:29 that makes me laugh 19:20:31 everyone who's at least 1 inch into opensource know that he should not take techrights seriously 19:20:32 please. can we once and for all agree that we don't care about whatever roy says? :) 19:20:42 yes please 19:20:51 henne, you're not getting it 19:20:52 lets just make an awesome foundation 19:21:03 let's push on - we all agree we need the announcement 19:21:12 I'll write a draft by friday for review 19:21:20 its created not by techrights, but by the other article over at groklaw... and that FUD is being created rapidly copied across many media sites this week 19:21:21 next ? 19:21:21 thanks alan 19:21:47 so either the announcement makes clear that the Foundation is not under the control of Alan or it isn't. That's what I'm trying to say here 19:21:50 suseROCKs: let's prove them wrong with our results :) 19:22:09 yaloki, ask AlanClark's permission for that please. 19:22:28 jfyi, i already closed an issue about membership team members 19:22:40 I'm not saying the announcement is from me - only that I took the AI to draft it. the announcement will be from the board 19:22:59 okay 19:23:02 i wrote an email that they can suggest new people to join the team and if they agree, we'll add the person 19:23:09 the next AI is bug #670589 19:23:12 openSUSE bug 670589 in openSUSE.org (Board) "Review the openSUSE Strategy Document" [Critical,New] https://bugzilla.novell.com/670589 19:23:24 this is its own topic today 19:23:26 that actually has its own topic 19:23:32 two comments 19:23:39 one its too long and vaugue 19:23:40 hold to actual topic please :-D 19:23:40 and 19:23:41 is there a specific strategy meeting ? 19:24:04 i need some real clarity and polishing 19:24:08 yaloki: from the board? 19:24:12 obviously drafted by commitee 19:24:14 yaloki, no its that strategy document given to us a couple of months ago that we let slip into the cracks 19:24:14 20:22:46 < suseROCKs> that actually has its own topic 19:24:25 ah okay, sorry, misunderstood then 19:24:29 please lets discuss when the topic is due 19:24:32 okay 19:24:47 the next AI is bug #670602 19:24:50 openSUSE bug 670602 in openSUSE.org (Board) "Clean up openSUSE.org queue on openfate" [Normal,New] https://bugzilla.novell.com/670602 19:25:00 this is about our queue in openfate 19:25:13 its pretty much static by now (no new additions) and we should clean it up 19:25:22 ok 19:25:22 this is a task for everbody 19:25:52 * mrdocs logs in 19:25:52 just look at the individual features and see if they fit our "where do we need to improve" section of this meeting 19:26:05 with 11.4 just around the corner, I'd like to propose that any new major initiatives coming from openFATE or in the meetings be held off until after March 10 19:26:08 they might be undoable, general or even technical features for the distribution 19:26:43 ok next AI? 19:27:01 next AI is bug #670590 19:27:04 openSUSE bug 670590 in openSUSE.org (Board) "user search for bugzilla" [Normal,New] https://bugzilla.novell.com/670590 19:27:04 is there an URL for the list of items in openFATE ? 19:27:19 prusnak: http://bit.ly/opensuse_improve 19:27:24 that is my AI 19:27:24 prusnak, https://features.opensuse.org/query/run?search_string=&tag=&search_products[]=opensuse.org&search_status[]=unconfirmed&search_status[]=new&search_status[]=marketplace&search_status[]=implementation&search_status[]=done&search_status[]=rejected&search_status[]=duplicate&search_status[]=validation&type=find&commit=Search 19:27:32 oh, henne's is shorter 19:27:33 woah, URL of ph34r 19:27:37 i didn't come around to do it because of FOSDEM and stuff 19:27:39 still open 19:27:50 ETA is end of march 19:28:02 lot's of false items in that list ... 19:28:02 errr end of february 19:28:13 prusnak: clean it! 19:28:23 i plan to 19:28:26 okay there are no other action items 19:28:36 Huzzah Huzzah 19:28:59 so lets go back to topic #2 19:29:12 or #1? 19:29:35 we have to re-introduce that guy?? 19:30:14 #topic Introduction of new board members 19:30:14 mrdocs welcome to the openSUSE Board 19:30:17 hehe, err no 19:30:18 Everybody meet Peter aka mrdocs Peter.. meet them. 19:30:20 :) 19:30:22 mrdocs: please introduce yourself :) 19:30:32 how about #3? ;) 19:30:44 well it might take all night :P 19:31:11 mrdocs: c'mon. say a few words 19:31:18 no need IMO and i think people are getting to know me.. was great to see again and meet others at FOSDEM 19:31:46 okay then lets go to the next topic 19:31:51 i'd like to remind alan and peter to fill-in their empty slots at http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Board 19:31:55 certainly I am appreciative of all the kind words and warm welcome... especially the board and other candidates 19:31:57 done 19:32:00 next ? 19:32:11 #topic Discussion of new meeting times and joining -project meetings 19:32:17 and add photo and a couple of warm words about them 19:32:18 prusnak: oki will do 19:32:20 prusnak: will do 19:32:43 We've talked about merging board + project meetings since so much overlaps. 19:32:50 +1 19:32:57 mrdocs: AlanClark: thanks 19:32:58 for the moment this time is ok for me... i agree on the merge 19:33:00 But we decided to wait until the newbies came on board before we determine a good meeting time for board meets 19:33:17 henne: so, newbie on the board, do you agree? :D 19:33:18 +1 as long as we generate the agenda ahead of the meeting 19:33:19 I'm sure henne would love to have earlier board meetings so he's not meeting while at home 19:33:23 as long as i plan this is a good time 19:33:24 so i guess everyone on the board is for the merge 19:33:36 agenda ahead of the meeting is a must 19:33:44 myeah 19:33:54 a post on news.o.o or anywhere else on planet would be much appreciated 19:33:55 yes and perhaps a mailing a day ahead to -project 19:33:56 so the only thing remains unsolved: time 19:34:03 the "event" thingy on the wiki is weird at best 19:34:12 yup 19:34:16 i could not sort it 19:34:19 so if that's the case, then I guess meeting for project would start an hour before board? 18:00 UTC? 19:34:34 difficult for me 19:34:48 i thought there will be no more project and board meeting 19:34:51 i should say very difficult, but after 2000 CET is ok 19:34:52 but just one meeting 19:34:57 prusnak: yes 19:35:13 ok so project meeting at this hour too? 19:35:15 so please do not distinguish these two anymore 19:35:19 less meetings more time to get stuff done 19:35:28 That might be a problem if we're hoping to increase traffic through combination... As this is now evening in Europe, isn't it? 19:35:31 +1 for keeping the time 19:35:42 or earlier in the day 19:35:59 also rupert claims to be unable to make most of the meetings at this hour 19:36:15 1600-1900 difficult with kids+dinner 19:36:15 so I'm cool with 16:00 (which is 9 a.m. for AlanClark) Thoughts? 19:36:19 apparently he isnt able to... 19:36:22 ahh never mind that 19:36:25 I'm cool with 16:00 19:36:44 so we just move all the board topics into the project meeting? 19:36:59 or the inverse :) 19:37:02 henne: i would call it Board+Project meeting from now on 19:37:02 I think that's the aim 19:37:04 brb 19:37:07 and have only one agenda for it 19:37:18 the board is a part of the project :) 19:37:22 yes 19:37:28 we can just fill the project meeting with life again 19:37:29 and the project is part of the board :-D 19:37:36 but if it was called only project meeting, people will keep asking where's the board meeting 19:37:41 and should encourage everyone else to do the same! 19:37:52 prusnak: apparently we need to tell people ;) 19:38:01 I think that's an education thing, prusnak 19:38:04 but i don't know if the meeting title is the right place for this... 19:38:16 so the only one objecting is mrdocs? 19:38:21 title is trivial... can we get back to figuring out the hour??? 19:38:37 i mean objecting to the hours 19:38:40 16:00 UTC 19:39:01 its a kids thing for him. That's not something we can work around 19:39:03 very bad for me 19:39:04 mrdocs: thats, depending on summer time or not, 17:00 or 18:00 for you 19:39:26 also the project meetings are not the most active ones 19:39:29 18:00 until march, then 17:00 i'd guess 19:39:31 1600-1900 utc is the worst 19:39:33 we ususally get more participants in here 19:39:36 anything earlier and we run the risk of a grumpy AlanClark and we don't want to offend our boss :-) 19:39:42 how about we move this question to a doodle with a list of times 19:39:42 lol 19:39:51 feed him extra coffee :) 19:39:59 root beer ;-) 19:40:06 how about we keep this time? 19:40:07 loaded with caffeine :) 19:40:13 + keep 19:40:13 and move the project meeting here? 19:40:15 but 19:40:22 a doodle poll is ok too 19:40:22 well, for Europe, 16:00-18:00 UTC is typically the time where people leave work and eat 19:40:24 i agree with creating a doodle 19:40:25 * drago accepts AlanClark as a hero (root beer) 19:40:25 sounds likie we have no choice, henne 19:40:28 can't be any worse time tbh 19:41:06 if i set the doodle right now, can we agree to fill it up by tomorrow ? 19:41:15 prusnak: please 19:41:17 prusnak: creating a doodle is pointless because we also want participants that wont fill out the doodle.... 19:41:26 henne: +1 19:41:43 prusnak, FYI, I can't read the damn doodle website. So I'll just have to +1 what everyone agrees on in the end 19:41:44 if you think noone will join at somehour then put NO in your doodle 19:42:03 what is wrong with this time? 19:42:10 and move the project meeting here 19:42:12 nothing at all 19:42:20 +1 for this time 19:42:21 I think we have no choice but to do that 19:42:28 +1 19:42:30 okay 19:42:30 hm 19:42:34 wait a second 19:42:39 waited 19:42:41 i thought we want to move it, but i'm fine with leaving it as it is now 19:42:42 isn't that a sign that we should keep them separate ? 19:42:49 but we won't achieve the goal of increasing traffic 19:42:52 yaloki: the meetings? 19:42:53 project meeting: switch between times that suit USA and EU well 19:43:08 where AlanClark and suseROCKs can moderate it for US, and henne, mrdocs, prusnak for EU 19:43:12 yaloki, but project meetings have almost zero attendance 19:43:13 its the same people anyway 19:43:18 its us 19:43:19 and for the board meeting, it's most important that all board members are there 19:43:45 well it's highly unfair if we only focus on EU timezones 19:43:49 yes and mrdocs cant move to the project meeting time 19:43:53 project meetings, for the most part to me seem like just a mere formality 19:43:57 and everyone else is here already during this time :) 19:44:05 there will be no optimal time.. but for the board this is very important 19:44:09 okay, was just thinking out loud 19:44:18 I agree with yaloki, project meetings are necessary however small it is 19:44:22 yaloki, both times are business hours for us here in the US 19:44:28 I'm ok with as early as 14:00 UTC 19:44:33 what about rupert ? is there good time 19:44:36 manugupt1: we won't skip it. we will just merge it with this meeting 19:44:50 henne: manugupt1 is speaking about the timezone 19:45:05 for the project meetings, we don't need to have everyone from the board in the meeting 19:45:10 yaloki: in which universe is he? :) 19:45:13 hence for those, it would be nice to rotate the times 19:45:25 henne, 0200 hrs for me 19:45:28 the project meetings at 12:00 UTC make no sense 19:45:37 henne: why? 19:45:40 yaloki: that's a good idea for project meeting if we rotate 19:45:45 nobody participates that doesnt participate always 19:45:49 yaloki, I agree... IF there was actual traffic at Project meetings. But they're so empty and blah its like...why bother? 19:45:59 suseROCKs: isn't it empty because the timing is bad ? 19:46:04 and because it's not properly announced ? 19:46:05 In other forums I've tried rotating times - it doesn't work. 19:46:31 I would prefer board meetings not be rotated time-wise 19:46:38 What about the marketing meet time, lots of people are there at that time 19:46:47 manugupt1: when is that ? 19:46:56 Its around 930 pm +530 hrs 19:46:56 manugupt1, that's the time we had this morning 16:00 UTC for Project... not many people there 19:47:04 how about we had just one time, but we'd put agenda before the meeting on mailinglist, send minutes after and have a discussion on ML as well ? 19:47:33 as if broadening the discussion would lead to better results 19:47:35 look guys 19:47:40 no matter which meeting we run 19:47:45 project or board meeting 19:47:48 prusnak, that's how its done on other projects. GNOME for example. And I see good discussion as a result. But here I brought it up a while ago and there was fear it would cause -project ML spam and trolling 19:47:49 its always the same people 19:47:50 us 19:48:05 can we just decide what we do now without making it too cmplicated? :) 19:48:15 gnome board people also have phone calls, we can't have that you know ... 19:48:29 Hum? 19:48:37 oh phone calls 19:48:40 yeah I'm opposed to phone calls 19:48:42 henne: yes - call for a vote on two questions 1) merge or not 2) 16:00 19:48:51 okay another 5 minutes to decide. or we move on to the next topic 19:49:25 1. merge +1 2 16600 UTC no 19:49:28 * henne looks for the call to vote button 19:49:33 I propose merge and post minutes is the best 19:49:56 1) yes 2) i don't care 19:50:06 i have no life anyway :) 19:50:23 1) merge 2) no 19:50:23 prusnak: I saw that ;-) 19:50:47 crap :-) 19:50:52 ok so 1) merge 19:50:56 so merging is done 19:51:09 everybody agrees yes? 19:51:13 now the time 19:51:13 seems so 19:51:16 yes 19:51:19 16:00 is a no go 19:51:24 what about 19:00 as this meeting? 19:51:36 +1 19:51:36 I think that's the only choice, vote or not :-) 19:51:40 +1 19:51:42 +1 19:51:47 +1 19:51:48 and you can't prevent it from being discussed on -project anyway :) 19:51:59 yaloki: of course not... 19:52:06 mrdocs? 19:52:09 Ok.. one question do you plan to mail the minutes too 19:52:09 yaloki, more like we *should* be propogating it to -project 19:52:13 +1 19:52:19 henne: i voted first :) 19:52:22 okay then this is a done deal 19:52:31 manugupt1, we're starting to do it on news.o.o. But I think we need to also send to -project as well 19:52:53 #agreed we merge the project and board meetings and have them ALWAYS every second wednesday at 19:00 UTC 19:52:54 but that's another topic and we should discuss that later. 19:53:10 next ? 19:53:10 umm 19:53:15 that wording is wrong henne 19:53:23 There's an AI from this. Who will take the AI to update the calendar? 19:53:23 is it? 19:53:25 "every other Wednesday" is the proper one 19:53:33 #undo 19:53:33 Removing item from minutes: 19:53:38 every second Wednesday sounds lik eonly the 2nd wed of each month 19:53:40 #agreed we merge the project and board meetings and have them ALWAYS every other wednesday at 19:00 UTC 19:53:54 +1 19:54:00 #action henne update the calendar on news.opensuse.org 19:54:17 what about announcing this? 19:54:27 anyone who wants to take this AI? 19:54:32 I'll do it tonight 19:54:36 but question.... 19:54:37 writing it to -project is enough i think 19:54:42 do we also merge the two pages on the wiki? 19:54:48 sure 19:54:55 what will be the official agenda page now? 19:55:09 could we discuss #3 please ? 19:55:33 suseROCKs: lets just call it project meeting 19:55:39 ok 19:55:43 i agree, project meeting 19:55:43 now on to #3 :-D 19:55:43 +1 19:55:46 fine with me 19:55:51 less confusion 19:55:53 brb quickly 19:56:08 #topic Review of communication with open-SLX 19:56:29 ok I brought up this topic so I should start the lead on it :-) 19:56:38 good 19:56:42 go for it :) 19:56:54 I'm concerned that things are going like a train wreck these days. And I feel that we can no longer respectfully discuss this quietly but to discuss it openly 19:57:09 because right now the community seems confused about openslx's role and thinking they're doing things authoritatively 19:57:24 and that's definitely not supposed to be the case here 19:57:40 suseROCKs: can you give an example? 19:57:49 and I feel they've taken advantage of the quiet nature of our discussions rather tahn open public discussion 19:58:02 drago, just one? :-) 19:58:31 I point to 3 examples: 1. Their new portal, 2. DVD artwork and 3. yesterday's move of the German OWN to their portal 19:58:36 I mean, where people think that theyre doing authorative 19:59:15 drago, because people think that what they're doing is the right thing because they're not seeing any discussion publicly around here 19:59:28 well 19:59:30 yes 19:59:31 and openslx tells people they have the authority because they've been granted it by Novell 19:59:38 and we're all going "huh?" 19:59:40 so we finally have to put the dirty stuff out 19:59:42 and becaus ethey invest money 19:59:48 "because", even 20:00:10 pah 20:00:35 did they tell the Novell tale also on the OWN thing? 20:00:37 okay can we keep this down to specific things? :) 20:00:42 drago: no 20:00:57 drago, apparently according to my sources, they are claiming they told Novell of the OWN plans yes 20:01:08 suseROCKs: uh what? 20:01:10 * drago did not hear about 20:01:23 suseROCKs: do you know names? 20:01:30 but in reality, even if they told Novell, or someone in a hallway, that does not constitute communication to the Project 20:01:40 of course not 20:01:44 exactly 20:02:05 i thought henne was about to investigate 20:02:11 and I think in Novell all people are on the same page meanwhile 20:02:24 I'm not so sure about that drago TBH 20:02:25 prusnak: investigate what? 20:02:40 prusnak: i still have the AI to setup a meeting with everybody 20:02:50 if people mentioned in the openslx email were aware of the OWN move 20:03:08 suseROCKs: that might not seem so to the open-slx representatives 20:03:28 drago, But in our quiet discussions with them, we tried to explain that to them 20:03:45 but they are saying they are in the right because they talked to x or y in Nuremberg and that's all they need for approval 20:04:06 drago, that's why I'm also very concerned with your response this morning re: Jacqueline and artwork 20:04:08 suseROCKs: I know the mechanism 20:04:26 suseROCKs: than we have a misunderstanding there 20:04:32 drago, because if there's something we don't like after all is done, they will say But we had approval from Jacqueeline... 20:04:58 they will, but that wont help 20:05:00 drago, Not we "you and me" We... us and openslx.. because they WILL twist it around that way 20:05:14 because we will produce the promo dvd 20:05:15 it hasn't helped so far! :-) 20:05:32 and we will use the artwork that comes out of the artwork community 20:05:36 that is out of question 20:05:54 and openslx can use whatevertheywant on the commercial box 20:06:02 I got no problem with that 20:06:05 same 20:06:12 but then where are they? 20:06:18 and if they want ot play nice, they also check with the community 20:06:24 well... 20:06:29 IF they... 20:06:44 suseROCKs: where are who? 20:06:45 ok so let's see where that goes 20:07:08 suseROCKs: I doubt we can convince them to go with our design on "their" box 20:07:09 tbh, I find the whole attitude very concerning 20:07:13 henne, "who" = openslx... I'm seeing no communication from them whatsoever to our teams and most people aren't getting a response back from them when pinging them 20:07:25 suseROCKs: yes 20:07:28 suseROCKs: okay 20:07:39 drago, and I honestly don't care about the boxes. (to some extent) 20:07:43 I can volunteer to try to talk again in person if you want 20:07:44 yaloki: we all do :-/ 20:08:03 what they do with the boxes is their decision pursuant to whatever is part of the contract they have on it. 20:08:09 yes, but still it would be more nice if the comm-box were also in community design 20:08:13 correct 20:08:15 1:0!!!! 20:08:35 take that you wine drinking, pizza eating loosers! 20:08:39 oh wait. that us too 20:08:40 now yaloki you have some concerns? 20:08:50 * drago is lost 20:09:03 sebas: I'd really like to see an explanation on why german OWN is moving to open-slx.de other than a personal attack on me putting barriers between part of the community 20:09:04 in fact at FOSDEM i found we have a need for separate covers for the promo DVD 20:09:29 the promo DVDs re completely under our control 20:09:33 "parts" even 20:09:36 mrdocs: you mean a GNOME and a KDE flavour? 20:09:42 we have to come up with everything now 20:09:46 for reference to yaloki's statement, he's saying http://saigkill.wordpress.com/2011/02/04/german-weekly-news-relaunched/ 20:09:47 drago: exactly 20:09:51 what we put on and around it that is 20:10:20 ok so clear up with me... we're producing the promo dvds, but they are doing the pressing, right? or? 20:10:24 drago: no need to change the DVD.. just the cover 20:10:36 well, if I may, it's not just about the promo DVD 20:10:47 * suseROCKs listens to yaloki 20:10:53 yaloki: understood.. go on.. 20:10:54 1) the platform they set up on community.open-slx.de 20:11:01 suseROCKs: no. we are doing everything 20:11:03 it is a fork of existing infrastructure of opensuse.org 20:11:11 suseROCKs: no, we're producing it 20:11:12 now, fine, it is certainly a better tool for less experienced people 20:11:20 I don't think anyone is or has ever questioned that 20:11:29 they've put a lot of resources into doing it, that's great 20:11:31 suseROCKs: thats why we asked Jacqueline to get offers for the production 20:11:32 oh then promo dvd + openslx is a non issue here... never mind 20:11:39 and I don't believe that anyone wants to kill it off 20:11:44 *but* 20:11:53 not discussing it openly in the community 20:12:02 not informing all of those whom it may concern 20:12:20 informing the board one week before it happened 20:12:22 not having it on an open source platform (which is at least for me an issue= 20:12:34 (arguably, there were quite some misunderstandings there, let's put that on communication problems) 20:12:36 yaloki, well... the way I see it... the creation of the portal was problematic. because it duplicated efforts. 20:12:44 drago: our forums aren't opensource software either 20:12:49 But the "hijacking" of OWN to their site is egregious 20:12:59 well, that was just #1 20:13:10 2) german OWN moved to open-slx.de 20:13:14 I don't see the point, really 20:13:24 it cannot be a technical reason as the other languages are still on opensuse.org 20:13:28 do they even have the right to do that? 20:13:33 so besides a marketing stunt, I really cannot see what the point is 20:13:42 and which is why I asked why on saigkill's blog post 20:13:42 well.... 20:13:45 and to sebas on IRC 20:13:46 suseROCKs: as long as they do not use the trademark 20:14:08 saigkill who is doing the german OWN 20:14:11 drago, the name OWN is openSUSE Weekly News... Therefore I would argue that they are using the trademark 20:14:14 is moving it somewhere else 20:14:24 there is nothing we can do about that 20:14:31 and nothing we should do about that imho 20:14:37 seriously?? 20:14:52 other then talking to sascha 20:14:59 I think we need to publicly decry this move 20:15:23 well he could also have moved it to saigkill.wordpress.com right? 20:15:30 It is simply wrong to actively defragment the Project 20:15:39 and it still would have been wrong 20:15:44 I disagree 20:15:48 it looks quite a lot like an intentional shift to move all german speaking infrastructure to open-slx.de 20:15:49 instead of opensuse.org 20:15:49 and that is the exact opposite direction of what we've been trying to do since many years 20:15:49 (especially regarding the forums) 20:15:49 yes so lets talk to sascha 20:16:00 i know 20:16:04 so lets talk to sascha :) 20:16:22 ah, and they have been lying 20:16:30 that puts even more reason for concern 20:16:37 the way they have communicated 20:16:46 (they = stefan, sebas, saigkill, at least) 20:16:47 I don't believe they've been honest with Sascha 20:16:56 suseROCKs: +1 20:17:08 btw, Sascha isn't even an intern, he's just a volunteer 20:17:10 Could you explain such accusations? 20:17:10 such as sebas stating that open-slx is working on getting their portal under the opensuse.org domain 20:17:20 sebas: sure, read above 20:17:41 sebas: you wrote that on your blog a couple of hours after stefan told the board to go eff themselves (not literally, of course) 20:17:54 Rupert has checked how that'd work, no? 20:18:04 checked what? 20:18:09 Where is Rupert btw? 20:18:27 sebas: and also that the OWN move was agreed upon with certain people at novell, we know it's not true 20:18:33 best is to talk to Rupert about that, the forum is his baby and you probably know best how to talk to each other 20:18:49 I feel that accusing him of lying is unfair though 20:19:05 sebas: I didn't say rupert was lying 20:19:12 sebas, but you're the one who broke everything when we were attempting to negotiate a good compromise for everyone 20:19:17 what bothers me a bit is the amount of pushback we get when we try to do things in a new way 20:19:30 sebas: you really really wonder about that? 20:19:33 I'd at least expect inertia, not negative pushback 20:19:35 sebas: actually, lemme rephrase: you lied (or were extremely misinformed, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that), and stefan lied 20:19:39 sebas: new way has to be different from secret way 20:19:50 sebas, right smack in the middle of a meeting negotiating a truce one day ahead of the planned announcement of the portal, you went ahead and announced the portal when you guys knew fully well we were talking to you about it. 20:20:10 sebas: so the new way is doing stuff in your corner, duplicating existing infrastructure and then just not care about pissing people off ? 20:20:10 henne: yes, I do, but it seems to be comon to be met with infinite arguments, rather than some form of encouragement for new cool stuff 20:20:13 sebas: in your own primary community, what would happen if i start a new techbase for KDE on kde.opensuse.org? 20:20:20 a lot of good faith was erased when you changed at will 20:21:00 yaloki: if you look closely, you'll find that what you make "duplicate infrastructure" is actually different in approach *and* target 20:21:00 or starting kde.open-slx.de for german speaking part of the kde project 20:21:01 sebas, the point we're trying to make is "Where is the discussion???" 20:21:01 henne: good point 20:21:09 sebas: err, well, no 20:21:19 sebas: [x] forums, [x] planet, [x] wiki 20:21:22 suseROCKs: I'm not sure we need anymore discussion in openSUSE 20:21:24 sebas: i mean seriously. i understand you don't want to get involved in this mess.and i can totally understand 20:21:42 "anymore discussion in openSUSE??" how about an actual discussion??? 20:21:56 I'm much more inclined to work with the people that have cool ideas and motivation than endlessly discussing what we may do, and how we have to fit it all in 20:22:16 okay, so no need to be "concerned" any more, know we know for sure 20:22:31 sebas: so why would everyone else work for "you" then ? 20:22:37 sebas: so your way or the highway? :) 20:22:39 sebas, that's an insult to the project. This project has really begun to move forward, and people are working on improving things and then all of asudden they find openslx has stolen the flooor from under them when they've put so many hours of their free time into something 20:22:49 sebas: if you and others at open-slx don't think they need to discuss it with the rest of the community ? 20:22:50 I mean, is that right??? 20:22:51 I don't need nor do I want everyone to work for me 20:23:08 okay, obviously this cannot be solved over IRC, and certainly not if only one person from openslx is present 20:23:17 sebas: you changed your understanding of community? 20:23:25 sebas: stop using our packages then 20:23:26 and I think I shouldn't be thrown stones in my way when doing a couple of crazy things 20:23:32 prusnak: thats true 20:23:37 after a long and continuing standstill, I might add 20:23:41 prusnak: +1 20:23:55 can we agree on some phonecall or even personal meeting? 20:23:58 yeah, I don't expect anything to be solved, and I'm not angry or anything 20:24:13 but? 20:24:17 openslx is based in NUE, right ? 20:24:23 or nearby 20:24:25 well that's even worse, I could have understood statements like those when being angry 20:24:28 sebas: can we get stefan or whoever is the powers that be to get this sorted with the board 20:24:29 My intention is much more to give some facts about what we're doing, maybe understanding leads to less pushback 20:24:47 facts would be nice... ahead of time 20:25:02 sebas: you really want to continue to ride the dead horse that we're not understanding what your doing? 20:25:04 sebas: how is it a pushback, you just do what you want without caring about the others 20:25:06 mrdocs: my understanding is that the board and Stefan know very well where to find us 20:25:13 sebas: i mean c'mon. its not rocket science or anything 20:25:17 sebas: the HOW is the problem 20:25:23 often the result is though to ask us to delay anything, and that just doesn't always work 20:25:36 sebas: either you start to talk to us on that level (the HOW level) or this will just escalate further 20:25:37 right, the two blog posts would have been a week later 20:25:49 henne: what's "escalating"? 20:26:20 sebas: the whole situation 20:26:23 yaloki: you might consider that it's not just "two blog posts later", but a later launch of an end-user support platform 20:26:30 sebas: between openSUSE and open-slx 20:26:36 sebas, I hardly think asking openslx to delay a few days so we can all come to a positive understanding was too much to ask for. Seriously! Instead you, yes you!... decided to buck what was already agreed upon and moved the launch one day earlier. 20:26:50 that's our product, so even if it's not important to you, it might be to others 20:27:04 aha 20:27:08 "that's our product" 20:27:11 maybe, but not to the project, which we stand for here 20:27:13 that's the point... it was important to us to understand how and why it had to come to this. But there's no discussion at all 20:27:16 well 99% of "your product" is the community's 20:27:21 yaloki: yeah, end-user support ... is that any new? 20:27:40 and not wanting to talk with those 99% is surprising, to say the least 20:28:04 drago: exactly, and we all need to learn how we can make companies who want to build a project on top of openSUSE and contribute back live's easy 20:28:32 sebas: and we're telling you: come talk to use with whatever you do 20:28:36 open-slx is maybe one fine example for a company that is not Novell to get substantially integrated in the openSUSE ecosystem 20:28:37 sebas: sure, and we all have to learn to play fair 20:28:41 sebas: you frequently ignore that 20:28:57 the point really is: where do we draw these lines 20:28:59 sebas: mentioning "integrated" now is.. erm.. weird? 20:29:00 sebas: and that needs to change 20:29:07 integrated into the ecosystem???? 20:29:11 I don't think this will bring us further tbh 20:29:20 yaloki: if you stopped the polemy for a bit, that 'd be more productive 20:29:21 indeed 20:29:25 no it needs to be done differently 20:29:31 lets stop this discussion before it gets even more nasty 20:29:37 sebas: it's not polemy, you still haven't answered a single question about that 20:30:05 yaloki: please be more clear with your questions, I'm doing my best to answer 20:30:07 sebas: you just permanently ignore our points, and just say that we are pushing you back 20:30:36 sebas: when are you going to talk to the project about your decisions? 20:30:40 sebas: on ANYTHING 20:30:57 Which decisions are you talking about exactly 20:30:58 ? 20:31:13 sebas: for instance to start your own german user support platform 20:31:18 you mentioned hosting stuff o open-slx.de, is that one of those? 20:31:22 sebas: or to move the OWN to open-slx.de 20:31:33 sebas: nope. i mean specifically those two things now 20:31:51 So, that's one of our products, ok? Why would we need an OK from the openSUSE board for that? 20:32:04 you don't need an OK from the opensuse board for that 20:32:06 And: What if we get a no? Are we changing our plans then? 20:32:12 you need to do these things inside the opensuse community 20:32:24 you need to be transparent 20:32:30 or the board, as representatives of this project, will stand up and tell you that this sucks 20:32:35 henne: and that's exactly the problem, there seems to be very little wiggle room for new things 20:32:39 and you need to stop assuming that talking to someone at Novell = approval 20:32:55 sebas: why do you say that? 20:32:59 basically, everything gets more complicated, we got this impression after the wiki project 20:33:07 watching this from my not completely impartial standpoint, i think you need a mediator 20:33:13 sebas: if you have worked with the community on making this happen, like everybody else, you can do a lot of things 20:33:21 where you == (board, openslx) 20:33:26 so with the end-user support platform, we wanted to create something, and then have people evaluate it 20:33:40 sebas: yes. thats the wrong approach 20:33:45 release early, release often 20:33:49 henne: we have worked with some people in the community that delivered lots of positive energy 20:33:52 there is not enough assumption of good faith on either side 20:33:52 Bille, Stefan asked that I be a mediator between them and Novell since I knew very little about them... But right now, I need assurances that everyone will act in good faith in the mediation, and they're not. 20:33:58 that doesn't include everybody, of course 20:34:06 sebas: there is not a single mention of this on ANY of our communication channels 20:34:18 Yes, because it's a product launch 20:34:21 sebas: its not possible for ANYONE to participate that you don't ask 20:34:23 suseROCKs: you're not impartial enough. 20:34:29 public mailinglists don't work so well with product marketing 20:34:31 sebas: and we're an open source project 20:34:32 Bille, Not anymore. 20:34:46 Bille, The things that I uncovered in the last month just turned me off 20:35:09 it's difficult to be impartial when you've been lied to 20:35:13 sebas: well tough luck. this is an open source community 20:35:21 i wonder if ungethym would step in here as well and try to filter out the he said, she said. 20:35:22 yes yaloki that's the problem. 20:35:30 sebas: and if you need to do something in private and secretive youre wrong here 20:35:52 sebas: seriously. somehow you need to integrate your efforts into this community 20:35:55 so, let's take a step back 20:36:00 sebas: or else we will always have this problem 20:36:00 it's not like novell don't have secrets :-) 20:36:10 there is obviously a communication issue 20:36:11 cb400f: exactly 20:36:16 I'm not sure, are you threatening? 20:36:18 sebas thinks we're just pushing back 20:36:26 cb400f, it doens't matter if Novell has secrets. openSUSE is not Novell. openSUSE belongs to the community. 20:36:34 sebas thinks we want to kill off what they're doing 20:36:57 I'm a bit disappointed that this is all you understood, yaloki 20:37:01 we think that by doing it how they do, they are pissing off people 20:37:23 sebas: that's all you've been saying 20:37:27 they are pissing off people or else we woldnt have this discussion 20:37:28 yaloki, except we don't *think* that. We've already gotten such complaints and concerns 20:37:51 there is one more thing to talk about, which would make both working with community assets and infrastructure easier, and that's trademarks 20:38:25 that is work in progress 20:38:25 sebas: no sorry. there is only one thing to talk about. how you change the HOW of your doings 20:38:35 sebas, you're aware we're currently in trademarks review overhaul, right? 20:38:43 I know that the trademark stuff is not exactly trivial in general for a Free Software project, and probably even worse with trademarks being in Novell's hands, but it does cause some concern wrt to continuity 20:38:52 sebas: because you are receiving pushback, very clearly now 20:38:53 suseROCKs: I'm glad to hear that 20:39:07 I'm just trying to summarize the positions a bit 20:39:07 sebas: then please correct me 20:39:07 sebas: and let's hear you out 20:39:10 sebas, seriously? You didn't know? i thought you had a handle on what's going on in the community? 20:39:26 mmm let's not go there 20:39:36 henne: To be quite honest, I'm not sure telling me how exactly I've to do my work is very productive 20:39:43 sebas: please, see above, if you're disappointed on my summary, then please correct me 20:40:04 sebas: how did I misrepresent your opinion/position ? 20:40:15 suseROCKs: Well, my last status is that we're not sure what novell wants with the trademark, or Attachmate 20:40:20 sebas, it s not about how you do your work, its about taking away the work from others who were already working on something 20:40:28 suseROCKs: +1 20:40:33 suseROCKs: okay, that was a better formulation 20:40:36 exactly 20:40:38 suseROCKs: I'm not following every detail, I'd love to, but can't 20:40:40 sebas: so again. your way or the highway 20:40:51 henne: I'm really sorry you feel that way 20:40:59 eh 20:41:06 sebas: me too 20:41:28 sebas, You feel somewhat threatened and offended by how we're "telling you how to do your work". Don't you think the same feeling applies to the others who were doing the same work? 20:41:36 alright, we won't get any further on this I guess, at least not here and now 20:41:44 the "overall feeling" I get from this is that you make it very hard to do something cool with openSUSE, and that does bother me 20:41:50 I mean, its not about technicalities here. Its about being decent and doing the right thing and acknowledging what people are and have already done 20:42:01 suseROCKs: neither of those, I just think it's unrealistic 20:42:02 sebas: which is pretty much what I said above 20:42:05 sebas: yes making it the way you do it we make hard 20:42:17 sebas: so, tell me one thing 20:42:35 sebas: put yourself into the position of those who were putting their free time into the german speaking forums on opensuse.org 20:42:42 sebas: they were not involved into your portal 20:42:57 sebas: and suddenly, out of the blue, your portal is there 20:42:59 Is it OK, wanted, or "rather not" if I pass this discussion on to Stefan, btw? 20:43:04 sebas: so, how would you feel then ? 20:43:16 sebas: seriously, you don't feel that open-slx is fragmenting the german-speaking community? 20:43:22 I gather you'd want him to read your requests 20:43:39 sebas: this is public 20:43:42 (fwiw, I've not been involved in this discussion in the past -- I know nothing specific about this except the blog posts I read) 20:43:51 sure, asking our of courtesy :) 20:44:32 sebas, I'd love to see us come back to the table. It was openslx that walked away from the table. We're still here waiting 20:44:56 btw, my motivation to talk about this is because I'd love to see things working well, and I'm not really interested in pissing people off or anything like that 20:45:10 * vuntz gives a +1 to what prusnak said earlier: this should be discussed in-person to make progress :-) 20:45:16 but also not about being told how I would handle things 20:45:18 then get us back to the table, sir :-) 20:45:23 and I'm thirsty 20:45:31 it doesn't really affect what I'm working on technically, either 20:45:45 cause the bar is closed 20:45:45 not sure it fits into the analogy though :) 20:45:52 vuntz: yes, seems so 20:45:53 we had a wonderful opportunity to work things out early in January, and instead its gotten more full-blown beceause there's an unwillingness to talk. 20:46:18 so sebas if you really care, then I urge you to encourage your superiors strenuously to come to the table. There is always compromise somewhere in life. 20:46:40 suseROCKs: the thing is, it's not my highest priority item personally 20:47:12 umm... I honestly don't know how to respond to that 20:47:17 and the irony is that Rupert is really the best person to talk to, and at least henne is and yaloki was on the same board of directors 20:47:40 sebas, Do you see Rupert here? 20:47:47 yes, quite honestly, I'm not myself working on the end-user support, I'm a developer and designer and I work on Plasma 20:47:55 sebas: if you're not willing to make it something of a priority, you shouldn't have participated in this part of the meeting :( 20:48:04 but I mean, the situation is solved for the moment, right? 20:48:11 yes 20:48:12 suseROCKs: nope, but that shouldn't stop you from talking to him 20:48:29 Bille: well, I'm not "participating" in any meeting, per se 20:48:41 honestly... he's not been around at meetings, and takes weeks to respond to board mails 20:48:48 I just read my name in the same line as lie and decided to continue my plasma hacking later 20:49:05 suseROCKs: I'll ping him 20:49:10 okay lets move on please 20:49:17 sure, thanks for your time 20:49:20 sebas: thanks that you spoke up 20:49:27 well, i'm going to get back to my hacking. 20:49:38 henne, I said in our agenda discussion last night that this topic would take up most of the meeting and I wasn't kidding :-) 20:49:42 np, hope it balances on the positive side 20:50:02 yeah we seriously need to work this out somehow 20:50:05 okay next topic 20:50:25 #topic openSUSE Strategy 20:50:39 we have two sub-stopics 20:50:50 1. Board review and action due when? 20:50:53 before we go on.... 20:50:57 henne: honestly, it isn't my favourite way of spending the night, quite stressful to talk to 5+ people at once 20:51:13 let's take an agreement... do we want to spend the whole agenda today or do a cutoff? since we're already at almost 2 hours 20:51:47 sebas: i don't particularly like 5 people talking to you at once either ;) 20:52:10 and I don't particularly find 5 people liking me all at once either :-) 20:52:17 suseROCKs: you ask as you had something better to do :) 20:52:17 sebas: come on, I saw you managing 15 at a time ;-) 20:52:26 hey prusnak ... watch it! :-D 20:52:38 drago: yeah, as long as nobody asks questions and just listens, it seems to scale 20:52:39 lets see how far we come until 21:00 UTC okay? 20:52:48 I think that we can do a quick action on the strategy topic. 20:52:50 or 21:30 UTC 20:52:54 21:00 is in 9 minutes, right? 20:52:57 yes 20:53:01 kepp going 20:53:27 let's close at 21:00 20:53:27 i will bring up cutting the meeting at 21:30 again. good? 20:53:35 go +1 20:53:40 +1 20:53:41 go+1 20:53:41 well I'm taking a 1 minute break.. brb 20:54:02 * henne subsctracts that from suseROCKs payroll 20:54:14 suseROCKs: you know owe us $1 20:54:18 ka-ching 20:54:38 let's have mrdocs speak on this topic. Then I have a proposal for an action item 20:55:05 i think there is only one action item 20:55:10 put this up for a vote 20:55:50 well just 2 short comments: the current strategy statement is IMO not what we want, nor does it reflect reality 20:56:06 pays henne $1 20:56:31 mrdocs: who is we? 20:56:43 this is what we (ALL OF US) have come up with 20:56:52 in a very lengthy and painful process 20:57:11 so who is your "we"? :) 20:57:14 2. its way too long, too vague and needs to be less about what we are, but shoulf be about what we want to be.. aspirational.. simple and motivating 20:57:31 henne: overall community 20:57:53 we do need a strategy statement in place rather soon. Especially the marketing team. 20:58:01 oh i know 20:58:48 mrdocs: but this is what the overall community came up with? 20:58:50 henne: and to a native speaker it looks like edited by community.. no disrespect to those who speak En as 2nd, 3rd language 20:59:03 s/community/committee 20:59:39 henne: what i would like to do is quickly try to condense this into something shorter and clarity 20:59:48 here's the thing... when we did all our strategy discussions, we never really put in a good timeframe for completion. 20:59:56 it _is_ edited by committee 21:00:01 and without a timeframe, we will discuss endlessly. There will never be a statement that appeases everyone 21:00:20 henne: fine for the concepts.. not for the final edits 21:00:35 but if there are some really bad things in the current statement, then we need to review, and revise and send it back to the committee for improvement 21:00:41 quickly 21:00:51 the entire declaration of independence, one of the great works of English was written by one person ;) 21:01:11 so 21:01:19 mrdocs, yeah but he used ctrl+c/ctrl-v :-D 21:01:28 hm but editing this means it has to go back to the committee(s) 21:01:39 I propose: AlanClark and get together and do our tweaks 21:01:57 mrdocs types faster than I do 21:02:00 I'm sorry but _every_ sentence in this document was molded under great pain 21:02:04 integrating all those concepts into something shorter and more and consise 21:02:19 henne: i understand completely 21:02:20 just editing it just isnt going to solve anything 21:02:35 didn't Jos already make "mission statement" which was 3-4 lines thing 21:02:40 henne, let's see what they come up with in the next... 2 weeks? 21:02:57 henne: as it is it us not usable for marketing, nor is it inspiring 21:03:15 really 21:03:18 mrdocs: i don't question that 21:03:32 i'm just saying: we have tasked a team of people 21:03:41 with creating that document 21:03:44 again, let's just put this to the test and let them propose their edits and we see again in 2 weeks. Is that okay? 21:03:48 and now we're going to edit it? 21:03:55 im game for an alternative... i just think this is the most expedient 21:04:21 suseROCKs: i think ANY edit leads to more month of discussing this edit 21:04:37 suseROCKs: hell if we don't edit this in any way and just say 21:04:41 hey we edited it 21:04:45 henne, but the point is after their edits, we may see the reasoning more clearly than we do now 21:04:51 we would end up with another 6 months of discussion 21:05:13 so henne your voting that we post the document? 21:05:13 :) 21:05:14 the quality of the dits don't matter 21:05:17 they may have some really good sound advice for a clearer proposal, and after all, even with a committee, the strategy statement is still a board initiative and needsd the full confidence of the board if we're going to implement it. 21:05:20 edits* 21:05:30 henne: no... as I will preamble the proposal with the exact reasoning for why we did what 21:05:39 * mrdocs has some good arguments in his pocket 21:05:45 but not for now 21:05:46 mrdocs: and this will spark another round of discussions 21:05:59 oh is that what's in your pocket, mrdocs? I thought you were just happy to see us 21:05:59 henne: not with a well written doc 21:06:00 mrdocs: really. i understand what you want to do. and i agree with it 21:06:08 i just also know where this will lead 21:06:32 henne: i also see where you are coming from.... 21:06:33 every single word of this document we discussed to death! 21:06:41 im not being stubborn 21:06:42 i say enough 21:06:52 lets put this up for a vote 21:06:59 as is ? 21:07:02 yes 21:07:13 me is a no for sure 21:07:13 then we can improve it in another round 21:07:20 let's fix it now 21:07:24 AlanClark: thoughts ? 21:07:33 I vote no 21:08:20 how does the rest of the board vote? 21:08:31 could we phrase a question 21:08:32 ? 21:08:33 I also vote no, not because I agree with one or the other,, but because we should allow ourselves the opportunity to be confident with whatever we end up as our final proposal. And clearly we don't have unified consensus right now. 21:09:06 prusnak: jos sent around a document the strategy team has produced 21:09:15 It is, after all, the board that will be the guardian of this strategy statement, just as it is with the guiding principles 21:09:25 prusnak: the question is if the board tries to rewrite it to be more clear 21:09:31 i know, i read it, i'm just wondering what NO and YES mean in this case 21:09:37 prusnak: or if we just put it up, as is, for a vote 21:09:50 yes means we put it up for vote as is 21:09:55 no means we rework it 21:10:39 no means we have mrdocs and Alan review and provide the board with suggestions 21:10:46 actually i don't think it matter what you vote ;) 21:10:55 we already have 3 no 21:10:57 i vote yes 21:10:59 and we're 5 today 21:11:19 so "no" it is right? 21:11:24 seems so 21:11:29 okay 21:11:55 #action mrdocs review the strategy statement and provide the board with suggestions 21:11:59 I still want us to do it with a decent timeframe. is 2 weeks from today reasonable? 21:12:05 suseROCKs: very 21:12:06 #action AlanClark review the strategy statement and provide the board with suggestions 21:12:16 suseROCKS is correct - we have to set a deadline 21:12:36 next board meeting ?.. seems fine with me AlanClark ? 21:12:37 do we agree on next meeting as a deadline ? 21:12:44 I'm ok with 2 weeks to review and report to the board 21:12:49 done 21:12:52 next ? 21:12:57 AlanClark, remember that you and I will be at hackfest in 2 weeks. 21:13:06 okay 21:13:06 * mrdocs will be heading overseas 21:13:19 so i want get it done 21:13:24 so again, I ask... is 2 weeks reasonable? 21:13:25 +to 21:13:35 suseROCKs: no problems... confirmed 21:13:41 ok 21:13:46 2 weeks is ok 21:13:51 great 21:13:56 henne: next ? 21:14:16 okay 21:14:26 #topic Bugzilla setup for tracking Board AI 21:14:43 i guess everyone is clear by now how we are doing it right? 21:14:49 doing what? 21:14:50 brb quickly 21:14:51 * suseROCKs ducks 21:15:07 * suseROCKs puts mrdocs's brb on his own $1 tab 21:15:09 quick recap - bit.ly/opensuse_board_ais 21:16:11 that link only covers open or all? 21:16:22 open 21:16:23 this is only open AIs 21:16:48 ok 21:17:08 so is there anything needed to discuss in this topic? 21:17:16 nope :) 21:17:19 next topic? 21:17:22 any technical gotchas we need to be aware of? 21:17:22 yeah 21:17:26 is there a time frame for search? 21:17:35 longer term is there a different way to handle this outside bugzilla ? 21:17:39 time frame for search? 21:17:48 people search? 21:17:53 user search 21:17:54 mrdocs: we just started using bugzilla :) 21:18:22 AlanClark: opening the bug against bugzilla has ETA end of february 21:18:39 mrdocs, in the last meeting we discussed all the options and settled on bugzilla. Sorry, you should have run for election in the last board cycle :-) 21:18:45 AlanClark: its the AI bug #670590 21:18:48 openSUSE bug 670590 in openSUSE.org (Board) "user search for bugzilla" [Normal,New] https://bugzilla.novell.com/670590 21:19:01 henne: I know i'm lookin at it 21:19:09 suseROCKs: ok i can live it.. im not motivated enough to create something else 21:19:12 AlanClark: look closer ;) 21:19:19 AlanClark: i track ETA's in the whiteboard 21:19:29 hey I barely passed my drivers eye exam ;-) 21:19:40 I flunked mine 21:19:46 * mrdocs gets new ones tomorrow 21:19:47 * henne doesnt have one either 21:19:56 I asked them if I could use suseROCKS white cane 21:20:09 LOL 21:20:11 to beat up the eye exam guy? 21:20:28 AlanClark, believe it or not, they have special DMV testing places for people who are almost blind 21:20:31 okay next topic right? 21:20:37 next? 21:20:37 a friend of mine who is legally blind passed! 21:20:42 next 21:20:45 #topic openSUSE Foundation 21:21:05 I wonder if we should have a dedicated Foundation meeting soon? 21:21:07 i only have one thing i want to discuss 21:21:34 WTH are all of you in those discussions? :) 21:21:35 suseROCKs: that explains why mine friend got his driver's license in california immediately after saying he's from europe :) 21:21:42 I made changes to create topics. Do we need t/ want to discuss here? 21:22:04 prusnak, its California that has that special DMV :-D 21:22:07 henne: we've been busy just like you :) 21:22:08 AlanClark: i think you violated the proposed rules there... 21:22:19 no I followed your recommendation 21:22:20 mrdocs: but i did participate ;) 21:22:42 henne: i will for sure.. its of great importance 21:22:44 AlanClark: yeah but not jdd's :) 21:22:56 then I missed jdd's 21:23:08 henne, I'm the sort that lets things in an ML get discussed out before I finally pipe in. I find doing so makes people think I'm less controlling :-) 21:23:11 AlanClark: we agreed upon that the one who starts the thread is also the moderator 21:23:36 I put the moderators in based on AI from this meeting 21:23:50 the problem with jdd is if he wrote in French i could understand him all the time 21:23:54 yep. without really discussing it 21:24:27 It's just a wiki, we can change it, as I wrote in my email. I just wanted some defaults 21:24:29 not blanks 21:24:30 shouldn't we be setting the topics and moderating them? 21:24:46 please. we discussed the rules on the list 21:25:10 http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Foundation/Rules 21:25:19 if we want to change them 21:25:24 lets discuss it there too 21:25:47 then I propose we no longer have Foundation as a topic here in Board meeting. Let it all be handled over there 21:25:59 under one condition 21:26:01 which is where I posted the email outlining the changes i made 21:26:10 to the portal page 21:26:16 you all start to actively participate 21:26:18 pointless for us to discuss it here if anything here holds no weight 21:26:24 yup 21:26:29 agreed 21:26:36 agreed to what? 21:26:44 pointless to discuss here 21:26:49 lets do it on the list 21:26:59 yes because this is no longer a board initiative 21:27:05 unless there is a specific action for us 21:27:25 suseROCKs: we wanted that right? 21:27:36 not exactly 21:28:07 i am no sure about one thing 21:28:14 do we want to discuss all topics at once? 21:28:24 because currently it seems so 21:28:29 that's my concern... we're creating a potential train wreck here 21:28:34 prusnak: We discuss a single aspect of the foundation at a time. 21:28:38 prusnak: rules #2 21:28:47 but there are 5 threads started by jdd 21:29:14 yes then help to stop him 21:29:29 its not about stopping someone 21:29:33 which is why I put the status field on the portal page 21:29:37 its about creating an environment where such a thing would occur 21:29:49 so that all would be able to tell which topics are open or not open for discussion 21:30:11 suseROCKs: please be specific 21:30:59 henne, when you and I took our stand in December it was about getting things out into the open and more transparent 21:31:04 where everything is visbile 21:31:08 *visible 21:31:36 but to my surprise during our stand in December, you went compeletely to the opposite end of the spectrum and basically completely removed it from board management 21:32:11 so if things do get out of hand (do you really think people diligently follow rules?) on the mailing list the way it is... that's really the very nature of it. 21:33:33 I mean some of the topics being discussed so far really have no relevance to the immeidate establishment of the foundation and the necessary paperwork we're supposed to be focusing on 21:34:51 Where's our leadership on this? 21:35:51 umm... did I forget to pay my ISP bill? 21:36:44 hm, so do you propose to restart a discussion again, or to keep discussion going and focus on the paperwork? 21:37:14 suseROCKS: I disagree that the topics are relevant 21:37:18 I don't think we can go back to the middle ground that I thought we were going for before. It just makes people suspecious :-) 21:37:55 but I think we definitely need to make sure the topics are focused on what needs to be done first, second third. etc. 21:38:12 so what is wrong with the way I did? 21:38:24 Do we even have a set of priorities of what needs to be done? 21:38:36 go look at the portal page 21:38:40 I mean I thought the only thing left to be done was to get the bylaws written up and submitted so we can have a foundation in a short while 21:38:40 yes please 21:39:12 I'll look at it again 21:39:28 but I have to admit its discouraging to see what will turn into hundreds of foundation mail flying by my inbox 21:40:07 that's why I liked henne's suggestion for focus 21:40:12 so you want an open and transparent discussion 21:40:20 without many emails in your inbox? 21:40:21 to keep the hundreds of emails on the same topic 21:40:42 no that's not what I'm saying 21:41:02 okay 21:41:02 what I'm saying is that if this is still a board initiative, then shouldn't the board be the one setting the topics and moderating? Not just whomever creates a thread? 21:41:27 If it isn't, then remove Foundation topic from board meetings altogether 21:41:59 we all agreed that we need to broaded the gruop of people that drive this 21:42:09 a good thing TM 21:42:12 to everyone who will do work in the foundation once its created 21:42:14 right? 21:42:17 no 21:42:27 we agreed to bring in as many relevant stakeholders to participate in discussion 21:42:36 we didn't agree to relinquish driving it from the board. 21:42:48 okay then there is the misunderstanding 21:43:11 I tend to agree with suseROCKS. The board has the background and knowledge of prior discussions. 21:43:41 yes 21:43:46 and we need to share this knowledge 21:43:47 the community entrusted us with leadership, we shouldn't just give it away at the drop of a dime 21:43:50 plus the domain knowledge 21:43:52 That will help keep the topics from rehashing 21:43:53 (or what's the Euro equivalent of a dime?) 21:43:55 and we need to make other people OWN this foundation 21:44:04 even if this means re-discussing things 21:44:13 for us 21:44:17 suseROCKs: 10 centimes... 21:44:40 henne, why wouldn't they feel that way? Technically, the community OWNS the board, doesn't it? 21:45:06 suseROCKs: because they can't lead 21:45:12 they cant decide 21:45:13 BINGO! 21:45:28 they can't make it theirs 21:45:54 and the foundation might be something we have started 21:45:54 so they should trust our leadership in driving what topics are currently to be discussed and relevant and what we've already come to conclusions on 21:46:09 but for it to succeed we need many more people to drive it 21:46:18 as you yourself have said, you want to get everyone off of square one and onto square 43297201 that we're already on 21:46:38 henne, drive it or participate in it? I' have no bones with participation. I'm all for it 21:46:45 suseROCKs: yes. that means we need to explain to them how we came to conclusions 21:46:58 but like a vehicle, you can only have 1 driver (or 2 if you have co pilot) per vehicle 21:46:58 suseROCKs: this does not mean that we declare ourselves special over them 21:48:23 suseROCKs: this vehicle that needs a complete crew to drive! 21:48:42 sure 21:48:51 but even with a crew, there's a designated leader, isn't there? 21:49:31 yes and thats us 21:49:41 henne: im kinda with suseROCKs... its the nature of hackers... most *want* to have good direction and leadership 21:49:57 okay 21:50:00 i give up 21:50:14 henne: so what do you want ? 21:50:19 henne, ok so where is our "designated leadership" in this module? I'm open to hearing 21:50:20 you have it your way 21:50:27 individual board members moderate the topics 21:50:48 henne: err i do not want you walking away pissed.. its too important 21:51:04 suseROCKs: looking over the discussion rules, we have set the topics, we have the most knowledge 21:51:24 mrdocs: i'm not :) 21:51:33 henne: good :) 21:51:44 mrdocs: i really don't have a problem with loosing an argument or being overules 21:51:49 overruled 21:51:51 henne: same :) 21:51:56 look here's the thing... 21:52:11 generally I expressed an opinion, because you asked me. 21:52:15 henne: but its easier when we are sharing a beer in the booth :) 21:52:26 But I don't think we can easily undo where we are at now... because it would just look really bad to take it back so to speak 21:52:47 so let's just trudge forward and be mindful that there is a possibility that things get out of hand but that we hope henne's rules work well 21:52:52 suseROCKs: the fix now is our participation on the ML 21:53:00 Ok - looking at the time. Let's stick with the current moderators. We can revisit this later if needed 21:53:23 mrdocs, in my opinion, when we participate in the ML we're participating as just any participant, not as a board member 21:53:24 AlanClark is the voice of reason :) 21:53:36 * suseROCKs turns off his hearing aid to the strange voices 21:54:07 ok let's move on 21:54:13 yes please 21:54:17 anything else ? 21:54:24 uhh yeah 21:54:27 (just kidding) 21:54:35 * mrdocs wonders is prusnak is asleep :) 21:54:39 suseROCKS: go back to those voices 21:54:48 mrdocs: i am not :) 21:54:55 prusnak: good :) 21:55:10 nah he's just disgusted with my constant troublemaking in these board meetings :-) 21:55:39 hehe 21:55:45 henne: next ? :) 21:56:09 lets skip "Where do we need to improve?" please 21:56:15 +1 21:56:17 and then head on to questions and answers 21:56:20 +1 21:56:24 +1 21:56:49 are we waiting for mine +1 :) 21:56:55 okay 21:56:57 no, rupert's 21:57:00 #topic questions and answers 21:57:17 in that topic tom just reminded us to update the board page 21:57:37 mrdocs, AlanClark please dont forget :) 21:57:46 any other more general questions? 21:57:59 why is the sky blue? 21:58:12 henne: i have the wiki page in edit mode :) 21:58:13 suseROCKS is listening to those voices again 21:58:47 suseROCKs: blue because molecules in the air scatter blue light from the sun more than they scatter red light 21:58:48 suseROCKs: because red is ugly 21:59:12 I make the motion to close the meeting 21:59:14 henne, then you need to visit a beautiful red desert sky in southern Utah 21:59:33 I invite you all out to see one 21:59:48 thank you prusnak I was afraid you'd say something archaic like "because it reflects the ocean" 21:59:57 okay done then 22:00:06 +1 22:00:08 thank you all for participating 22:00:14 AlanClark, Perhaps thats where we should have our F2F then 22:00:19 thank you all 22:00:33 thank you all... and henne i hope we still love each other :-) 22:00:36 thanks for the warm welcome from everyone 22:00:41 thanks for leading the mtg henne 22:00:51 #endmeeting