My apologies, Mohammad. Just getting up to speed on CloudStack. (My first time being a mentor.) I shall take care to read the older threads. :)
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din < nour.moham...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Noah... > > Please read my feedback inline > > On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org> wrote: > > How can people who do not use IRC participate in these meetings, or the > > discussions held at them? > > > > It is important that community discussions take place on the mailing > list. > > And where they take place off the mailing list, that they are summarised > on > > the mailing list. It is also important that people who do not use IRC are > > able to partake in discussions. > > Totally agree, and again, we have already discussed that. It is > already ASF rules and these rules have been conducted already on other > mailing threads. > > But IM sometimes give better chances to discuss things in details in > a way that might be better than having the same discussion over > e-mail. > > But no decisions will/should be made with bringing them back to the > mailing list and give all ppl involved the opportunity to give their > opinion and participate in the decision making. > > > > > One option is to hold meetings on IRC, post a summary of what was > > discussed, and then invite people on the mailing list to continue the > > discussion. But discussions must be copied to the mailing list, and > people > > must have a chance to participate. > > > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din < > > nour.moham...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi... > >> > >> Will not be able to have a times that suits all, try to get a time > >> that suits most of people for that time and they can attend next time, > >> taking into account having ASF rules when it comes to off the mailing > >> list communications. > >> > >> An idea I would like to propose is to have a certain list of topics > >> (agenda) for a specific IRC meeting so different people can evaluate > >> whether they should/shoudn't attend that meeting and hence you get > >> only the people interested and less people means agreeing on time > >> easier I believe. > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:34 PM, Joe Brockmeier <j...@zonker.net> wrote: > >> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012, at 04:21 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote: > >> >> The reason I'm opting for 21:00 UTC is that it's after dinner. > >> > > >> > That's totally reasonable... but 21:00 UTC is 17:00 for folks on > Eastern > >> > time in the U.S., which is usually the end of the work day for folks > who > >> > actually clock out at 5. (Actually, it's 17:00 part of the year, 16:00 > >> > part of the year since UTC is constant but you have daylight savings > to > >> > figure in for many timezones.) > >> > > >> >> I'd not rotate times, as that will confuse people. > >> > > >> > I agree with this - but if we go with a single time, it's going to be > >> > inconvenient for someone all of the time. So in that case, I guess > we're > >> > going to be stuck with deciding who gets stuck with an inconvenient > time > >> > all the time. > >> > -- > >> > Joe Brockmeier > >> > j...@zonker.net > >> > Twitter: @jzb > >> > http://www.dissociatedpress.net/ > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Thanks > >> - Mohammad Nour > >> ---- > >> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep > moving" > >> - Albert Einstein > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > NS > > > > -- > Thanks > - Mohammad Nour > ---- > "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving" > - Albert Einstein > -- NS
