Community Council Meeting (June 15, 2012)

2012-06-19 05:14 UTC by Craig Woodward


Meeting held on FreeNode, channel #maemo-meeting (logs)

Attending: Woody14619, Estel, SD69, Ivgalvez, NielDK, Stskeeps

Summary of topics (ordered by discussion):
  • Community Awards - approaching finale
  • Quim's e-mail about Nokia follow-up
  • IRC management
  • QT-components-10 promotion
  • Misc public topics

Topic 1 (CA planning):
  • Submissions end Sunday at midnight UTC.
  • We placed a self-imposed time limit of June 23rd for deciding winners.
  • Coucil should prepare their votes, meeting to be held Tues.
  • Email on the topic internaly is welcome as well.

Topic 2 (Quim's e-mail):
  • There is general sadness at the state of things in Nokia.
  • There is general happiness that Quim is still on board & keeping in contact.
  • There is concern that this may be our "6 month" warning sign.
  • Observation of Mer may be a good idea to avoid the same pits they've hit.

Topic 3 (IRC management):
>>>SD69 has an emergency & must leave.
  • A group account is proposed to "manage problems".
  • The concept is spoken against and rejected.
  • The concept of crafting a solid policy is raised.
  • Discussion is postponed as Estel drops.
  • NielDK takes the action item to look at similar groups policies.

Topic 4 (QT-components-10 promotion):

Topic 5 (Misc public topics):
  • Topic for next meeting: Chair responsibilities and speaking for Council
  • AI Review: The "first blog" is still not done. Is it needed now?

Action Items:
All: Review CA applications Monday, meeting Tuesday.
Woody: Contact X-Fade about qt-components-10 issue.
NielDK: Find other IRC/op policies for review & collaboration.


Uwe Kaminski
Karma: 483

Is it possible to reference "Quims email"? Thanks

2012-06-25 09:07 UTC
Piotr Jawidzyk
Karma: 980

Valid point, Jaffa, thanks for suggesting. It seems that most of the time, it's rather about not trashing public mail with very specific question, aimed @ only one person - but, if we've used it for CA, there is no reason we couldn't do same for anything else, not requiring to remain private.


2012-06-23 05:28 UTC
Andrew Flegg
Karma: 3342

Thanks for publishing the minutes, it's much appreciated and a definite improvement over the preceding council.

One comment, though: on the IRC/op policies discussion, although I understand the disagreement about the chair emailing X-Fade directly; why isn't that discussion happening on maemo-community (which X-Fade reads, and is sufficiently low traffic (again ;-)) that the council should be subscribed with immediate delivery)?

I would suggest that every time the council is considering using, or emailing someone about, they consider "does this have a reason to be private?" Most of the time the answer should be "no", and so maemo-community should be used instead.

2012-06-22 16:09 UTC


You must be logged in to make comments.