On 5/22/14 2:12 AM, Robert Kaiser wrote:
Matt Claypotch schrieb:
# Audience
The Project Meeting will switch from a 100% public call to available for
all Mozillians.
Doesn't that feel like we are moving to being less open?
Yes and no to me. It feels like we're more open to folks we know. We'
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Michael Kelly wrote:
> On 5/21/14 12:58 PM, Matt Claypotch wrote:
> > # Audience
> >
> > The Project Meeting will switch from a 100% public call to available for
> > all Mozillians. The goal is to have as lightweight a barrier to viewing
> and
> > participating in
I would argue that the Project Call, while it has always been…. passively open
(as in one *could* join) has not bee, during my time here, actively transparent
(as in easy for a total novice to the project to navigate and gain value from)
so I am not sure this is a big loss. I feel like the ways
Til,
I’d missed this before, and hearing that you did watch and value this is good
to know - makes me redact my previous statement. I’d love to see data about how
many folks like you are out there - while other sources have not shown me that
the project call was a strong connection point for ne
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Larissa Shapiro wrote:
> Til,
>
> I’d missed this before, and hearing that you did watch and value this is
> good to know - makes me redact my previous statement. I’d love to see data
> about how many folks like you are out there - while other sources have not
> sh
On 2014-05-22, 9:32 AM, Till Schneidereit wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Larissa Shapiro wrote:
Til,
I’d missed this before, and hearing that you did watch and value this is
good to know - makes me redact my previous statement. I’d love to see data
about how many folks like you are ou
On 2014-05-22, 10:54 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
On 2014-05-22, 9:32 AM, Till Schneidereit wrote:
I didn't actually watch the call all that often. I did read the notes
almost always, though. Hence my suggestion that we might continue
publishing the notes, with an explanation that they might be sli
Mike Hoye schrieb:
the project call happens around dinner time for Europeans
As a note, when I was only a casual contributor, times like that made
meetings ideal to follow for me here in Europe as I would not be in
other stuff like university or such. I don't clearly remember if that
meeting
I like the idea of publishing redacted-if-necessary notes. We're already
producing notes for the existing meetings, I'm sure we could strip out any
restricted content relatively easily as a "what's going on" checkpoint for
more casual observers.
That said, I'm 100% in favour of the overall pus
gerv and i used to do this long ago
ml
On 5/22/14 9:21 AM, Mike Connor wrote:
I like the idea of publishing redacted-if-necessary notes. We're already
producing notes for the existing meetings, I'm sure we could strip out any
restricted content relatively easily as a "what's going on" checkpoi
There are topics we are not permitted to discuss in a fully public forum
but can share with any self-identifying Mozilla community member. The goal
is to strike a balance between opening up information beyond staff-only
meetings and ease of access for interested parties. I'm trying to figure
out w
> Jim schrieb:
>
>> You have still not proven your claim that the CDM will be robust
There's nothing to be gained from debating robustness here. Us
convincing you about robustness is entirely beside the point. What
matters is Adobe convincing streaming service operators that Adobe's
solution meets
Yes, I forgot to mention this, but another change for the meeting would be
ensuring minutes/meeting notes are kept in an accessible place.
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Mike Connor wrote:
> I like the idea of publishing redacted-if-necessary notes. We're already
> producing notes for the ex
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 7:04 AM, Jim wrote:
> On 2014-05-21 19:24, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Jim wrote:
>>>
>>> The parts of an EME based media player not specified are implemented in
>>> JS/HTML making it an obvious target for a polyfill. Mozilla could have
>>>
No, I don't think so, but I would imagine an edited highlight reel from the
meeting would get a lot more views than simply a video of the whole
meeting. When I miss meetings I never have an extra hour lying around to
watch a video just in case something happened that I want to see.
On Thu, May 22
On 5/22/14, 5:54 AM, Larissa Shapiro wrote:
Til,
I’d missed this before, and hearing that you did watch and value this is good
to know - makes me redact my previous statement. I’d love to see data about how
many folks like you are out there - while other sources have not shown me that
the pro
Thank you, Potch, for working on this and sharing it with us.
I have mixed feelings about this proposal.
On one hand, I like that we have a fully open, public meeting
that those who are interested in Mozilla can attend.
On the other hand, I recognize the accessibility issues present with the
cu
On May 22, 2014, at 11:11 AM, Christie Koehler wrote:
> Could we also use this change as an opportunity to advertise other
> channels that are public, but specific to particular projects? E.g. "Our
> project-wide meeting is no longer totally public, but here are public
> meetings you can atten
On Wednesday, May 21, 2014 12:58:34 PM UTC-4, Matt Claypotch wrote:
>
> # Audience
>
>
>
> The Project Meeting will switch from a 100% public call to available for
>
> all Mozillians. The goal is to have as lightweight a barrier to viewing and
>
> participating in the meeting as possible. The
On May 22, 2014, at 5:19 AM, curtis.koe...@gmail.com wrote:
> Honestly, I am not a big fan of this change. The fact that we have an open
> and public meeting is what I think helps us build community. People can tune
> in and take a casual look at what we're up to. Find things they might be
> i
Looks like this slipped. No objections so I am going to update the wiki.
Kevin
On May 9, 2014 1:41 PM, "Clint Talbert" wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> As I have moved farther away from day-to-day code related duties, Joel
> Maher (irc: jmaher) stepped up as a leader among peers in my module. It's
> time
Hi all,
A user stopped by #sync recently inquiring about US Government requests
for user data. I've been unable to find any relevant information.
While we don't host much data at the moment, we're clearly moving in
that direction as we build out our service infrastructure.
Do we have any pl
On 5/23/2014 6:10 AM, Chris Peterson wrote:
On 5/22/14, 5:54 AM, Larissa Shapiro wrote:
Til,
I’d missed this before, and hearing that you did watch and value this
is good to know - makes me redact my previous statement. I’d love to
see data about how many folks like you are out there - while
On 5/23/2014 4:50 PM, Chris Pearce wrote:
In general I find time spend in meetings is usually productive time,
so I avoid meetings.
I meant to say: "In general I find time spend in meetings is usually
**un**productive time, so I avoid meetings. "
;)
__
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Chris Pearce wrote:
>
> I make the exception for the internal MoCo+MoFo Staff
> meeting, which I sometimes watch on Air.mo and *always* read Matt Brubeck's
> *excellent* notes.
mbrubeck's notes are awesome.
If a meeting doesn't have recorded output -- be it minut
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Nicholas Nethercote
wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Chris Pearce wrote:
>>
>> I make the exception for the internal MoCo+MoFo Staff
>> meeting, which I sometimes watch on Air.mo and *always* read Matt Brubeck's
>> *excellent* notes.
>
> mbrubeck's notes
26 matches
Mail list logo
