On 09/04/14 08:34, Thomas B. Ruecker wrote:
On 08/04/14 21:38, Lucien XU wrote:
Le mardi 8 avril 2014 20:43:07 Ragnar Kurm a écrit :
Secondly, I would like to structurize the pirate pad. As I see there
are
two main topics: status of projects and secondly how to enable healthy
collaboration. Just moving text, no deletion. If it is ok - I'll do
that, but then colors will be lost.
I think that you are free to organize the pad. Noone will blame you to
put more order, and colors can be retrived from the logs if needed.
General remark, we have a 1.5h time box that we will need to subdivide
somehow.
So aside from organizing things we'll have to decide on a few core
topics that are the most pressing and stick with those. I'd recommend to
not go lower than 15min and even that will be a challenge as it
effectively leaves ~12min for discussion if you account for topic
introduction, summary, verifying action points and conclusion.
For larger subjects that will require a lot of discussion I'd recommend
30-40min.
Those are just numbers I've pulled out of my … pocket. But IRC is a bit
slower than face to face and we were struggling with 5-10min slots
during FOSDEM.
Thirdly, I think it might be good to have someone to be a moderator (is
there a more appropriate word in English?), meaning:
* announcing agenda
* helping to keep discussion focussed according to agenda
* keeping track of time
* writing down the essence of discussion, not details
* writing down decisions along with who will fulfill it
In this mail [1], Filip Kłębczyk nominated Thomas B. Rücker as this
role. We are waiting for his reply.
I didn't realize people were waiting for me to say something, I sort of
thought there would be discussion on this topic first.
Generally, yes I'm available if the community wants this and if Jolla
accepts this.
On behalf of Jolla, we accept this. Any objections from community?
I'd also like to make it clear that I'll be strict, just as I was during
the community round table, and as this is IRC I will have to accept
taking swift action as an option, to ensure meeting order and adherence
to the agenda. To be clear, I would have to set aside my own flashy
collection of hats and wouldn't participate much if at all in the
discussion, I'd focus solely on moderating and chairing this and
maintain a neutral stance. I feel that this would be imperative for the
meeting to succeed, as "changing hats" tends to confuse people a lot and
we don't have time for that.
Related to what I just said I'd like to make it clear that I will NOT be
available as the chair of the later "extras/open-source-repository"
discussion meeting, as a) I have a *very* strong opinion on this b) I
will choose a side.
I have been working to make a proposal for agenda (note: this is my
proposal, not set in stone, but I think it is time to make one) - you
can add/propose changes/change at http://piratepad.net/SailfishOSSMeeting
We have limited time and I think it's possible to dedicate time every
two weeks to have a sync meeting. We have so many topics to discuss and
limited amount of time.
Agenda:
Focus on generating action points to be undertaken and discussing
problems and issues which would constructively lead to solutions.
1. Introductions of participants in meeting [something about you and why
you're here] - 10 min
2. When's next meeting: Regular meetings every two weeks around the
project? - 5 min
3. How to make contributing to Nemo/Mer easier [big topic] - 1 min
introduction
3.1: Current problems and situation, potential solutions [20 min open
floor discussion]
3.2: Solution proposal: Merge Mer and Nemo middleware [2 min intro + 10
min discussion] [suggested intro holder: Stskeeps/Carsten Munk?]
3.3: Solution proposal: Minimal/practical openness requirements and
process for open source components in Mer/Nemo/SailfishOS [5 min intro +
15 min discussion] - such as dedicated/listed maintainers/owners, etc.
[suggested intro holder: w00t/Robin Burchell?]
3.6 Action proposal: Participation and contribution policy for Jolla's
open source contributors in open source projects [5 min intro, 15 min
discussion] (Carol?)
3.8 Wrap-up and finalize action points
For next meeting(s):
0. Chum and such [bad summary, but tbr's topic suggested]
1 Specific issue: Closed bits of SailfishOS - why/where/how and relation
to open source parts
2: Plans on SailfishOS for Android [10 min intro, 15 min discussion]
x: Communication and transparency
x.1: Current problems and situation [20 min open floor]
x.2: At-meeting solution proposals [20 min open floor]
Reactions, flames, etc welcome.
/Carsten
Fourth, should the decisions and the essence of discussion be published
somewhere? Where?
If we are using the meeting bot in #mer-meeting channel, there should
be a log that will be generated and kept.
Yes, meetbot produces sensible logs. I'd recommend that everyone
familiarizes themselves with the common commands it understands:
https://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot (Howto, commands for everyone)
Please be aware that those go directly to the public log, so in case of
e.g. #action consensus of the meeting participants should be established
first, similarly for #info. If in doubt ask experienced meeting
participants or the chair to execute those.
For a log example:
http://merproject.org/meetings/mer-meeting/2012/mer-meeting.2012-01-10-12.02.html
(html logs and plain text logs available, in addition also logged as
colourful html by logging feature of same bot)
Cheers
Thomas
_______________________________________________
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
_______________________________________________
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
