Docs Meeting Time (Again)

[Zach Oglesby]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Zach Oglesby <oglesbyzm at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
>

Thanks to some changes in availability we now have a time that works
for all time zones involved. So our new meeting time is going to be
Mondays at 1 PM UTC, 9 AM EDT, 11 PM Brisbane, and 3 PM in CEST. I
will update the wiki today, and check for availability in
#fedora-meeting, if its not available we will move to an alternative
room. Thank you everyone in helping to find a time that works for as
many parties as possible.

Zach