Wiki-Robertbray at 21:38, 2 November 2006

2006-11-02T21:38:29Z

Show changes

Wiki-Robertbray at 21:32, 2 November 2006

2006-11-02T21:32:41Z

Wiki-Robertbray at 21:30, 2 November 2006

2006-11-02T21:30:41Z

Show changes

Wiki-Jasonbirch: /* Agenda */

2006-11-02T17:49:23Z

Agenda

Wiki-Jasonbirch: /* Agenda */

2006-11-01T23:18:40Z

Agenda

Wiki-Robertbray at 22:29, 1 November 2006

2006-11-01T22:29:14Z

Wiki-Robertbray at 20:30, 1 November 2006

2006-11-01T20:30:56Z

New page

[[MapGuide PSC]] - Home

== Meeting Info ==

The third meeting of the MapGuide PSC will take place Thursday November 2nd at 17:00 UTC (1:00 PM EST / 11:00 AM MST / 10:00 AM PST).

Meeting Chair: Bob Bray
Universal Time: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=11&day=2&year=2006&hour=17&min=0&sec=0&p1=0
Location: The meeting will be held on IRC at [irc://irc.freenode.net/mapguide #mapguide]

== Agenda ==
* RFC Process Discussion (let's try and close off the e-mail threads)
* Road Map/Release Schedule Discussion

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 ** Can we extend IRC veto to 48 hours to allow entire globe time for response?
-==Minutes==
+== Minutes ==
-===IRC Log===
+=== IRC Log ===
   jasonbirch	Ding
   -->|	zool (n=jo@tridity.org) has joined #mapguide
@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
   rbray	I thought I had that in there.
   jasonbirch	Can we set a default of 48 hours for motions, and 1 week for RFCs?
-	rbray	Andy: RFCs can pertain to both software and process.
+ rbray	Andy: RFCs can pertain to both software and process.
-	rbray	When they are required is one of the things we will need to work out over time.
+ rbray	When they are required is one of the things we will need to work out over time.
-	rbray	I think once the PSC doc is finally and approved for example, an RFC should be required to change it.
+ rbray	I think once the PSC doc is finally and approved for example, an RFC should be required to change it.
-	jasonbirch	rbray: agreed. We will have a motion to adopt at some point.
+ jasonbirch	rbray: agreed. We will have a motion to adopt at some point.
-	rbray	Hopefully by the end of this week or early next actually. I got some good feedback from the FDO PSC, and plan another round of changes.
+ rbray	Hopefully by the end of this week or early next actually. I got some good feedback from the FDO PSC, and plan another round of changes.
-	rbray	For highlights see the meeting minutes.
+ rbray	For highlights see the meeting minutes.
-	jasonbirch	Uh, I think that we should be involved in that; we want the projects to evolve independantly.
+ jasonbirch	Uh, I think that we should be involved in that; we want the projects to evolve independantly.
-	jasonbirch	But together :)
+ jasonbirch	But together :)
-	rbray	It included the last item on todays agenda, moving veto grace to 48 hours.
+ rbray	It included the last item on todays agenda, moving veto grace to 48 hours.
-	rbray	Yes we do. That is why I will send a mail to this PSC with the recommended changes before I make them.
+ rbray	Yes we do. That is why I will send a mail to this PSC with the recommended changes before I make them.
-	rbray	Just have not had the time.
+ rbray	Just have not had the time.
-	jasonbirch	Currently, I think that we require the entire vote time to elapse unless everyone votes, because we have the veto option. Is that correct?
+ jasonbirch	Currently, I think that we require the entire vote time to elapse unless everyone votes, because we have the veto option. Is that correct?
-	rbray	Yes. Votes are counted at the end of the specified period, unless we have 100% majority earlier.
+ rbray	Yes. Votes are counted at the end of the specified period, unless we have 100% majority earlier.
-	rbray	In this case you did not specify a duration, but we got majority anyway.
+ rbray	In this case you did not specify a duration, but we got majority anyway.
-	rbray	100% with Toms
+ rbray	100% with Toms
-	jasonbirch	fullality :)
+ jasonbirch	fullality :)
-	rbray	Is that in the dictionary?
+ rbray	Is that in the dictionary?
-	jasonbirch	I'd like to see a default 48 hours for mothions 1 week for RFCs, because I'll mess up again. It's in my dictionary
+ jasonbirch	I'd like to see a default 48 hours for mothions 1 week for RFCs, because I'll mess up again. It's in my dictionary
-	jasonbirch	(Jason's Unabridged and Unorthodox)
+ jasonbirch	(Jason's Unabridged and Unorthodox)
-	rbray	Hmm, I think this is where we have some confusion.
+ rbray	Hmm, I think this is where we have some confusion.
-	rbray	RFCs should be discussed first, then be brought forward for vote via a motion.
+ rbray	RFCs should be discussed first, then be brought forward for vote via a motion.
-	jasonbirch	true.
+ jasonbirch	true.
-	jasonbirch	sorry
+ jasonbirch	sorry
-	rbray	So you want RFC based motions to be 1 week?
+ rbray	So you want RFC based motions to be 1 week?
-	rbray	Seems long to me if we have already discussed them.
+ rbray	Seems long to me if we have already discussed them.
-	jasonbirch	By Default. The motion should specify less if it's an easy one?
+ jasonbirch	By Default. The motion should specify less if it's an easy one?
-	jasonbirch	Hmm. That makes sens.
+ jasonbirch	Hmm. That makes sens.
-	TomFukushima	Yes, I'm getting the developers here to put out RFCs that are not completely filled in, in case better ideas come in. Is it 1 week from when the incomplete RFC was posted, or after the final RFC is posted.
+ TomFukushima	Yes, I'm getting the developers here to put out RFCs that are not completely filled in, in case better ideas come in. Is it 1 week from when the incomplete RFC was posted, or after the final RFC is posted.
-	jasonbirch	Who makes the motion? Does an RFC need a PSC sponsor?
+ jasonbirch	Who makes the motion? Does an RFC need a PSC sponsor?
-	jasonbirch	It's one week from when a PSC sponsor makes a motion to adopt.
+ jasonbirch	It's one week from when a PSC sponsor makes a motion to adopt.
-	jasonbirch	But I think that 48 hours makes more sense for items that already have agreement on the mailing list.
+ jasonbirch	But I think that 48 hours makes more sense for items that already have agreement on the mailing list.
-	rbray	I think the doc says anyone can make a motion. Let me check.
+ rbray	I think the doc says anyone can make a motion. Let me check.
-	TomFukushima	Yes, I would prefer 48 hours.
+ TomFukushima	Yes, I would prefer 48 hours.
-	rbray	Ah, it does not say. So do motions need to be made by a PSC member? Developer? or Anyone?
+ rbray	Ah, it does not say. So do motions need to be made by a PSC member? Developer? or Anyone?
-	jasonbirch	That's anarchy. :) You say that anyone can make a proposal, but I think that motions should only be made by members of the committee.
+ jasonbirch	That's anarchy. :) You say that anyone can make a proposal, but I think that motions should only be made by members of the committee.
-	rbray	I was hoping you would say that.
+ rbray	I was hoping you would say that.
-	jasonbirch	Convincing one of us to make a motion shouldn't be that high a barrier...
+ jasonbirch	Convincing one of us to make a motion shouldn't be that high a barrier...
-	rbray	So proposals and RFCs can be brought forward by anyone, but a motion to approve must be made by a PSC Member.
+ rbray	So proposals and RFCs can be brought forward by anyone, but a motion to approve must be made by a PSC Member.
-	rbray	Everyone agree?
+ rbray	Everyone agree?
-	jasonbirch	+1
+ jasonbirch	+1
-	Andy	+1
+ Andy	+1
-	Haris	+1
+ Haris	+1
-	bdechant	+1
+ bdechant	+1
-	TomFukushima	+1
+ TomFukushima	+1
-	jasonbirch	I guess you're a +1 bob? Can we also agree to a 48 hour default timeline?
+ jasonbirch	I guess you're a +1 bob? Can we also agree to a 48 hour default timeline?
 	rbray	Yes I am +1
 	rbray	I would agree to that. +1

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:49, 2 November 2006
Line 12:		Line 12:
	* RFC Process Discussion (let's try and close off the e-mail threads)		* RFC Process Discussion (let's try and close off the e-mail threads)
	* [[MapGuide Roadmap\|Road Map]] / [[MapGuide Release Process\|Release Schedule]] Discussion		* [[MapGuide Roadmap\|Road Map]] / [[MapGuide Release Process\|Release Schedule]] Discussion
		+	* Quick clarification of eVote and IRC veto process
		+	** If no timeline specified on eVote, 1 week default? Or 48 hours default, 1 week specified if needed?
		+	** Can we extend IRC veto to 48 hours to allow entire globe time for response?

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 == Agenda ==
 * RFC Process Discussion (let's try and close off the e-mail threads)
-* Road Map/Release Schedule Discussion
+* [[MapGuide Roadmap|Road Map]] / [[MapGuide Release Process|Release Schedule]] Discussion

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
   Meeting Chair:  Bob Bray
-  Universal Time:  http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=11&day=2&year=2006&hour=17&min=0&sec=0&p1=0
+  Universal Time:  http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=11&day=2&year=2006&hour=18&min=0&sec=0&p1=0
   Location:  The meeting will be held on IRC at [irc://irc.freenode.net/mapguide #mapguide]

MapGuide PSC Meeting 11-02-2006 - Revision history

Wiki-Robertbray at 21:38, 2 November 2006

Wiki-Robertbray at 21:32, 2 November 2006

Wiki-Robertbray at 21:30, 2 November 2006

Wiki-Jasonbirch: /* Agenda */

Wiki-Jasonbirch: /* Agenda */

Wiki-Robertbray at 22:29, 1 November 2006

Wiki-Robertbray at 20:30, 1 November 2006