== Log == TZ UTC -4 {{{ [21:03] hi sabdfl, Technoviking [21:03] hello everybody [21:03] hello [21:03] my firefox is crashing, can't see the agenda [21:03] it's empty [21:03] sabdfl: did you file a bug :) [21:04] empty! [21:04] i love this delegation thing [21:04] Technoviking: hoping apport will do it for me soon [21:04] yes, the membership boards seem to be working well [21:04] :) [21:05] is there anything we'd like to discuss, now that we're here? [21:05] how are the IRC folks shaping up? [21:05] * mdke doesn't know [21:06] i haven't heard anything either way, since the flurry of activity [21:06] when we made the last round of appointments [21:06] * mdke nods [21:06] Technoviking: was there a decision at UDS about creating a "irc members" team? [21:06] perhaps we can ask the IRC Council to report on progress in a few weeks once the new members have settled in [21:07] +1 [21:07] sabdfl: I believe so [21:07] Technoviking: a +1 or -1? [21:07] +1 [21:07] same for forums, right? [21:08] what would the team be made up of? [21:08] operators? [21:08] yes [21:08] not necessarily, i think we should make it possible to be a respected contributor while not also shouldering ops [21:08] so what's the point of the team? just recognition of contribution to irc? [21:09] same as the point for ubuntumembers :-) [21:09] We have an "official" operator team for #ubuntu at: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-irc [21:09] contribution to ubuntu through irc participation [21:09] ok, so it would be a subgroup of ubuntumembers [21:09] yes, same as ubuntu-dev [21:10] ok, I suspect you can guess my opinion then :) [21:10] -1? [21:10] "send 'em to the regionals!" [21:11] i hear you from here :-) [21:11] :) [21:11] yeah, I think ubuntu membership should be conferred by the membership boards [21:11] from the perspective of "everyone who is interested", surely reporting is the key? [21:12] I think there are lots of advantages to having the process centralised, now that the centralised process is running smoothly [21:12] it's probably not the right time to rehash them though, I rant about them often enough [21:13] do you think someone should be an ubuntu-dev without being an ubuntumember? [21:13] i'm just trying to get a sense of whether you think some of the existing functional-delegation bits are broken [21:13] I'm in two minds whether -dev is a special case or not, I can see the practical convenience of the MOTU Council being able to push that through [21:14] I know some people who like to contribute to Ubuntu without the pressure of being an Ubuntu member [21:14] Technoviking: that's perfectly possible, either way [21:15] ok, well, let [21:15] sabdfl: I certainly don't think anything is broken, I just think it would be better to have membership a centralised process [21:15] 's not rehash it here [21:15] some people are not joiner, for various reason [21:15] +1 for not rehashing the discussion :) [21:15] is there anyone on the FC or IRC-C who is also on a regional membership board, i wonder? [21:15] I'm happy to be in the minority [21:15] to address consistency? [21:16] Mike :) [21:16] not sure about the IRC-C [21:16] sabdfl: I'm an ubuntu-mx member in theory [21:17] I think elkbuntu is both in IRC-C and Asia Oceania RMB [21:17] well, I think the regional board have a good feel for how the different area in Ubuntu work now, forums,irc, dev, loco, etc... [21:17] Rafik: good point [21:18] so we have *some* cross coverage [21:18] Technoviking: yep, they definitely do. It's great to have a mix of backgrounds on those boards [21:18] that's enough for now, let's see how it goes, re-evaluate in a few months, or if it blows up [21:18] ok [21:18] but for the moment, i'm happy [21:18] sabdfl: one point we could discuss is whether the existing meeting times for the CC are working, and whether the CC needs a new member to replace Jerome. That has been kicking around the mailing list for a while [21:18] err I'm on the Mexico loco, never mind [21:19] sabdfl: I think are working well, +1 [21:19] mdke: what's not on the list are nominations :-) [21:19] so let's start with times [21:19] sabdfl: that's your prerogative [21:20] i'd like to have nominations from the existing CC to consider [21:20] and would discuss them with the CC before proposing them formally [21:20] sabdfl: as I understand it, you make nominations. But we could discuss whether it's a good idea in principle to have another member on the CC [21:20] yes, i'd like more, and more non-Canonical, ideally too [21:20] let's start with the times [21:20] the TB has stopped trying to cover all timezones [21:20] ok [21:21] i'm tempted... [21:21] i don't know that our morning slot gets us much love in the far east, as it is [21:21] what do you guys think? [21:21] would a single, day-us-evening-eu time, be better? [21:22] what are the other options? [21:22] I don't really have a view, I've missed so many meetings recently so I don't have a feel for whether people would like different times [21:22] sabdfl: That would work for me, maybe we can be flexible for issues in other timezones [21:22] I know that I can only make -eu evenings, but I suspect that other members of the CC wouldn't be able to make that time so easily [21:23] alex_mayorga: if we're going to pick a time, we should try to pick one that covers as many tz's as possible [21:24] which usually means evening eu [21:25] given that we're the "buck stops here" point, it seems wrong to have a blanket policy that flat-out doesn't work for someone in australia [21:25] morning us works as longs as it is possible to access from behind corporate firewalls, I for one are behind one at that time with no IRC [21:25] we did the regional groups to avoid that [21:25] yeah, I agree. I think two times is reasonable, and we should be able to cover those with members in different TZs [21:26] especially if we add a new member or more than one [21:26] i dont think it is possible to get reasonable worldwide coverage with 1 fixed time [21:26] so that would suggest nominations from asiapac, especially, with a plan to do earlier in the morning eu + asia, and evening eu + usa [21:27] yes, although I guess the nominations shouldn't necessarily be conditional on TZ [21:27] well, we are replacing jerome [21:27] true [21:28] ok, i'll ask now that we talk on the list about candidates [21:28] i';m not going to do a wider call for them [21:28] anything else? [21:28] nothing here [21:29] sabdfl: does the TB have enough members? I recall reading about a call for nominations, but that must be a couple of releases back [21:29] we have two candidates, i will o ahead and nominate [21:29] wanted more to do a bakeoff [21:29] cool [21:29] mdke: I know Matt Z was feeling over worked on the TB [21:29] ok [21:30] thanks all! [21:30] thanks [21:30] thanks [21:30] night night }}}