pjones at redhat.com
Tue Nov 9 16:03:42 UTC 2010
On 11/09/2010 10:52 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/09/2010 03:39 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
>> On 11/08/2010 08:01 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>> It also often feels like decitions are being made by members of
>>> various comities without the voted party doing their
>>> homework/research on matters so they just show up and go with the
>> This is why I've been so picky about not putting things on the
>> schedule late (where late is after the agenda has been sent to the
>> list). I try to do at least a couple of hours of studying up on the
>> issues before each meeting, but that's difficult to do if the
>> agenda is altered.
> Stands to reason it might be difficult.
> Perhaps it's best to end a meeting on announcing the next meetings
> agenda which would give everyone the time between meetings to do some
> research for the task at hand.
I don't think there's any reason it needs to be that far ahead of time. As
the meetings are in the afternoon, just having them published (and set in
stone) the day before works fine.
> Kinda goes without saying that schedule would have to be set in stone
> and every new item that pops up in between meetings would be pushed
> to next meeting.
Yep. To be fair, Kevin has been better at this since I mentioned it.
More information about the advisory-board