couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [REMINDER] IRC meeting - 2013-04-24 19:00 UTC
Date Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:22:00 GMT

On Apr 24, 2013, at 16:58 , Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:

> Well, I don't like the idea of alternating times. I think it will become
> confusing and hard to plan for, and I think we will see less participation
> as a result. I also think that meetings held at 13:00 UTC will have very
> few participants. This becomes a problem when the meeting is important
> because of its proximity to another event (such as a release) because we
> have a bunch of people in the US that cannot possibly be expected to attend
> at that time.
> 
> The current situation is:
> 
> Meeting at 20:00 UTC, the optimal amount of people are able to participate.
> 
> We're proposing:
> 
> Meeting occasionally at 20:00 UTC and occasionally at 13:00 UTC. Many
> people unable to participate half the time. Meeting times become irregular
> and hard to plan for in general.

The status-quo is actually that we alternate 14:00 UTC and 20:00 UTC on a weekly 
basis. It is predictable and easy to plan. In practice this only has happened
twice. I don’t understand why we stick to what was agreed to in the past and
instead discuss this every month or so without actually giving the plan a shot.

Jan
--





> 
> This is a sub-optimal solution.
> 
> What is the problem we are trying to solve?
> 
> I don't think it's "how can we organise an IRC meeting so that everyone can
> attend?" (That pre-supposes the solution.)
> 
> I think it is more like "how do we get input from everyone?"
> 
> I think another avenue for us to explore might be to consider that when we
> post the minutes to the list, that's not the end of the conversation.
> 
> There are two points at which you can contribute to the meeting, without
> actually being there:
> 
> 1) In reply to the meeting reminder. We have invited this every time, but
> only a few people so far have actually added things to the agenda via this
> method. I would suggest that if people can't make the 20:00 UTC time, but
> they have something they want to add to the agenda, or they have some
> information to share with the group (like a status update), then they post
> it at this point.
> 
> 2) In reply to the minutes. As we saw with the action item Benoit brought
> up a week or so ago, I jumped right in, and started having a discussion
> about it on the mailing list. I had missed that particular meeting, but
> read the minutes, and started a discussion.
> 
> In my mind, this should be sufficient to ensure that everybody can input
> into the meetings.
> 
> Perhaps the 20:00 UTC time is not the most optimal solution. (i.e. The time
> when most people in the project can participate.) I note that the board
> meets at 17:30 UTC. I think that's a valid question, and one we
> should examine if it looks like there might be a better time. But I believe
> that we should pick one, single optimal time for everybody, and then work
> on ways to ensure that people who miss the meeting (either because of life
> getting in the way, or timezones) can contribute without impediment.
> 
> 
> On 24 April 2013 15:14, Dave Cottlehuber <dch@jsonified.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 24 April 2013 16:02, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>>> What about having two meetings?
>> 
>> Hi Noah,
>> 
>> We previously said we would alternate times "regularly" but I think
>> we've only done that twice. For all the obvious reasons I'd prefer not
>> to double up. What's the constraint?
>> 
>> A+
>> Dave
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> NS


Mime
View raw message