Docs Meeting Time (Again)

[Zach Oglesby]

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:00:15AM -0400, Zach Oglesby wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:52 AM, John J. McDonough <wb8rcr at arrl.net> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 09:25 -0400, Zach Oglesby wrote:
>> >> much as I value the input of Rudi and others in the AU, I think that
>> >> this will give us max participation, and the chance to have some great
>> >> folks step up and help out more.
>> >
>> > I think this only emphasizes the need to do more of our business on this
>> > list so that time zones aren't such an issue.  I have to admit that I'm
>> > among the worst offenders in failing to bring issues here, and ignoring
>> > those that do make it here.
>> >
>> > I have this feeling that we could somehow make this work better, but I
>> > don't really know how.
>> >
>> > --McD
>>
>> I could not agree more, the meeting is good to be able to talk about
>> things in a more interactive mode, but we should try and handle more
>> stuff on the list. As it stands now our SOP is to being something up
>> on the list before adding it to the agenda for the meeting, if we
>> actually follow that model it should keep the conversation focused on
>> the list, and make the meeting a secondary means of communication.
>
> This is another reason I like to send zodbot's minutes (as well as the
> URLs he publishes) to the list.  That way the flow looks like this:
>
> * Idea goes on list for discussion
> * After discussion, goes to meeting for general consensus/approval
> * Minutes indicate said consensus (using "#agreed <stuff>" and/or
>  "#action <someone> <do the thing that means it was approved")
> * Minutes go to list in the email with (or following) URLs, and no one
>  is surprised because topic was fairly and transparently handled
>
> --
> Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
>  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
>  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
>    The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com


Sparks brought up another idea on IRC today that we may want to have
two meetings, so that we can accommodate people in all timezones. I
have two questions I would like to pose to this for everyone to give
input on. Do you like this idea, the second is what are individuals
views for the point of the meeting (i.e. what do you feel that we are
trying to accomplish by having weekly meetings).

To me the meeting is helpful to get real-time communication with
people working on specific issues, by having two meetings we are able
to have this communication with more people, but we lose the ability
to make big decisions during a meeting. I will note that I don't think
thats really a bad thing, because as jjmcd has pointed out we need to
become more dependent on the list.

Zach