cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mohammad Nour El-Din <nour.moham...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: IRC Meeting Times
Date Sat, 08 Sep 2012 16:56:31 GMT
Hi Noah...

   Please read my feedback inline

On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> How can people who do not use IRC participate in these meetings, or the
> discussions held at them?
>
> It is important that community discussions take place on the mailing list.
> And where they take place off the mailing list, that they are summarised on
> the mailing list. It is also important that people who do not use IRC are
> able to partake in discussions.

Totally agree, and again, we have already discussed that. It is
already ASF rules and these rules have been conducted already on other
mailing threads.

 But IM sometimes give better chances to discuss things in details in
a way that might be better than having the same discussion over
e-mail.

But no decisions will/should be made with bringing them back to the
mailing list and give all ppl involved the opportunity to give their
opinion and participate in the decision making.

>
> One option is to hold meetings on IRC, post a summary of what was
> discussed, and then invite people on the mailing list to continue the
> discussion. But discussions must be copied to the mailing list, and people
> must have a chance to participate.
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
> nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi...
>>
>>    Will not be able to have a times that suits all, try to get a time
>> that suits most of people for that time and they can attend next time,
>> taking into account having ASF rules when it comes to off the mailing
>> list communications.
>>
>> An idea I would like to propose is to have a certain list of topics
>> (agenda) for a specific IRC meeting so different people can evaluate
>> whether they should/shoudn't attend that meeting and hence you get
>> only the people interested and less people means agreeing on time
>> easier I believe.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:34 PM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb@zonker.net> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012, at 04:21 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>> >> The reason I'm opting for 21:00 UTC is that it's after dinner.
>> >
>> > That's totally reasonable... but 21:00 UTC is 17:00 for folks on Eastern
>> > time in the U.S., which is usually the end of the work day for folks who
>> > actually clock out at 5. (Actually, it's 17:00 part of the year, 16:00
>> > part of the year since UTC is constant but you have daylight savings to
>> > figure in for many timezones.)
>> >
>> >> I'd not rotate times, as that will confuse people.
>> >
>> > I agree with this - but if we go with a single time, it's going to be
>> > inconvenient for someone all of the time. So in that case, I guess we're
>> > going to be stuck with deciding who gets stuck with an inconvenient time
>> > all the time.
>> > --
>> > Joe Brockmeier
>> > jzb@zonker.net
>> > Twitter: @jzb
>> > http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks
>> - Mohammad Nour
>> ----
>> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
>> - Albert Einstein
>>
>
>
>
> --
> NS



-- 
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein

Mime
View raw message