Oversight Board/2009/Log-2009-02-13

From Sugar Labs
Jump to: navigation, search
<cjb> hum, is the meeting now, or in an hour?
<walterbender> should be now, but it seems no one is here
<dfarning> good morning
<tomeu> hi!
<walterbender> good morning dave
<kristianpaul> hola
<walterbender> OK. I guess people were waiting for me to wake up
<walterbender> I have a relatively brief agenda today...
<caroline> good morning
-->| unmadindu (n=sayamind@gnu-india/admin/unmadindu) has joined #sugar-meeting
<walterbender> mostly want to make sure that we are on track re 0.84--what we can do to help erikos...
<walterbender> but also to discuss a few issues that have been at the center of debate in the commuity: bots and builds
<walterbender> and to give a quick update re fund raising and local labs
<walterbender> other topics?
<walterbender> hi caroline...
  • tomeu is happy with those topics
<dfarning> I would like to submit a request for travel expenses for the november sugarcamp
<walterbender> dfarning: we had mentiioned at the last meeting the need to get a finance report so that we could have a basis for our spending decisions...
<walterbender> this is a topic I had forgotten to include...
<dfarning> |--------------------------+----------|
<dfarning> | ASSETS | |
<dfarning> |--------------------------+----------|
<dfarning> | Cash and cash equivalnts | $3085.08 |
<dfarning> |--------------------------+----------|
<walterbender> in brief, I think we need to make a budget for Sugar Labs
<dfarning> | TOTAL ASSETS | $3085.08 |
<dfarning> |--------------------------+----------|
<dfarning> | LIABILITIES | |
<dfarning> |--------------------------+----------|
<dfarning> | | |
<dfarning> |--------------------------+----------|
<dfarning> | TOTAL LIABILITIES | |
<dfarning> |--------------------------+----------|
<dfarning> | BALANCE | $3085.08 |
<dfarning> |--------------------------+----------|
<dfarning> This is our balance sheet as of december 2008
<walterbender> good that we are in the black... what about our madoff investments?
<dfarning> |------------------------+--------|
<dfarning> | Name | Amount |
<dfarning> |------------------------+--------|
<dfarning> | Marco Pesenti Gritti | 542 |
<dfarning> | Tomeu Vizoso | 720 |
<dfarning> | Edward Cherlin | 300 |
<dfarning> | Christian Marc Schmidt | 171 |
<dfarning> |------------------------+--------|
<dfarning> | Total: | 1733 |
<dfarning> |------------------------+--------
<dfarning> this is our outstanding liability for travel
<walterbender> snce december?
<dfarning> yes, We will have an expense of about $1500 for our FSF sesrver coming up
<walterbender> which means we have zero funds...
<dfarning> we also have about $1000 donations since december
<walterbender> that is good.
<dfarning> yes basically zero
<walterbender> so I think we need a budgeting process...
<dfarning> That sounds good
<walterbender> We have a liability looming with Terri, don't we?
<dfarning> yes, of about $550, caroline has committed to paying that liability
<dfarning> I will work out the details an that and report to the slobs list
<walterbender> Sounds good. Maybe a brief update like this at the beginning of each meeting.
<walterbender> Now in regard to your specific request...
<caroline> yes writing to Bradley right now.
<dfarning> walterbender, yes i will have one each meeting no more the 5 minutes
<walterbender> great
<caroline> Right now it looks like $436.80
<dfarning> can we approve the travel request so SFC can write the checks?
<walterbender> I second the motion to approve the travel requests
<dfarning> caroline, walterbender lets work on the budget on slobs, it will take to long for this meeting
<cjb> it sounds fine. it would be good to know that we're slightly above zero rather than slightly below zero, so that we can afford to pay the FSF too when they ask.
<walterbender> can we put dfarnings motion to vote?
<walterbender> in favor, please /me yes
  • walterbender yes
  • caroline yes
  • dfarning yes
  • tomeu yes
<walterbender> opposed?
<cjb> I think I was technically voting for "more discussion", but I'm happy to let it go.
<walterbender> cjb: sorry. I didn't ask for a discussion period... I should have...
<walterbender> Let's reset.
<cjb> No worries.
<walterbender> Also, I think that only elected members can actually vote...
<walterbender> So, we have a motion and a request for discussion.
<dfarning> cjb, it is going to take time to work out the finance reporting issues with fsc
<walterbender> From Dfarning's report, it seems that the additional Jan. revenue keeps us in the balck.
<cjb> So, earlier Walter said that we should get an up-to-date balance before making a voting decision
<dfarning> it takes about 6 week for them to get income statements to us
<cjb> and we have an out-of-date balance that makes us look like we don't have enough money to fund this, but we're pretty sure the new donations cover the difference
<cjb> if we're going to be really rigorous, I think we'd do the sum all the way first
<dfarning> cjb, yes as with everything else it take time to set up the process
<walterbender> yes. perhaps we should modify the proposal to only pay out some of the travel money until we confirm that there are sufficient funds...
<cjb> (I mean, makes it look like we don't have enough money to fund our other obligations if we also fund this. We definitely have enough money for this.)
<walterbender> but in the future, have a mechanism for our treasurer to handle these gaps
<caroline> I hate to make people wait for money they have already put out.
<caroline> as for Terri, we won't commit to that obligation until I have put the money in it looks like.
<walterbender> we need to build a slight reserve to keep from getting into these situations...
<dfarning> Yes, I will do a post on iaep on general acounting issues for non profit so we are all on the same sheet of music
<walterbender> startup costs
<dfarning> let's postpone the vote until next meeting
<dfarning> and move on
<cjb> caroline: yeah, so it's worth checking that it won't be "total - travel - dell + terri" is less than you need for terri, even though you've already paid for it
<cjb> dfarning: sounds good. thanks!
<walterbender> and cjb, thanks for interjecting the discussion...
<walterbender> need to brush up on my Robert's Rules
  • dfarning needs to learn Roberts
<walterbender> Just a quick update on related matters:
<walterbender> I am writing an NSF proposal (due next week) to support a longitudinal study
<walterbender> and gatherings of teachers and developers to share these results...
<walterbender> it is a long shot, but why not?
<caroline> an amazing act of faith :)
<caroline> who knows maybe the government can change ;)
<tomeu> long shots++
<dfarning> sounds good, with a portfolio of long shorts it with be easy to put together new proposals as they come up
<cjb> oh, good point
<dfarning> s/shorts/shots/
<cjb> and it's practice at explaining our strengths, too
<caroline> we need to keep trying every way we can think of to get on the US Gov's radar
<walterbender> I also joined up as part of a proposal to the dept. of energy to use Sugar as part of a classroom experience around energy consumption...
<walterbender> sugar plays a minor role, but it maybe a little funding for some key development and more classroom exposure
<tomeu> heh, getting in the US Gov radar has been bad for some people :p
<walterbender> Evangeline and I are discussing more opportunities, as are JT and I.
<walterbender> I also floated a proposal to OLPC regarding covering some loose ends (including servers) during the transistion.
<walterbender> I got a favorable response from Chuck and Ed, but nothing concrete yet.
<tomeu> transition?
<walterbender> transition from OLPC handing all responsibility for software off to the Fedora and Sugar communities...
<cjb> tomeu: now that we're .. right, not trying to be a software house
<tomeu> ok
<cjb> it's less controversial to say that we're trying to transition everything out to SL and Fedora
<tomeu> didn't knew you had tried to :p
<tomeu> sorry about the bad jokes, I'm happy about addons.sugarlabs.org starting to work
<walterbender> I hear second hand that Ed is giving Sugar Labs access to the server hosting pootle...
<walterbender> I think there was some concern about ownership of the server, but we should discuss this when Bernie is around so we can hear his concerns.
<walterbender> In any case, I think that we will maintain a positive relationship with OLPC at this level of engagement.
<dfarning> yes, bernie will be back tomorrow.
<dfarning> yes, I agree.
<walterbender> I wish I had more news re $$. I still have a few outstanding grant applications,... need to keep writing.
<walterbender> Anyone else have any thoughts/comments on this topic?
<walterbender> If not, here is a quick update re local labs.
<cjb> walterbender: I'm curious exactly what the OLPC proposal was, but I don't mind not knowing until it's decided on if you'd rather
<caroline> Maybe our marketing people can help us with "Ask" letters so we can appraoch companies for partnerships
<dfarning> walterbender, it takes time. Almost all small businesses fail in their first year. We have nearly made it that far! Our odds of survival start climbing from this point on.
<walterbender> cjb: I'll dig it up from my email. The gist was support to help build momentum in the community, since we are suddenly more dependent than ever on the community...
<walterbender> and a few odds and ends, such as server support.
<walterbender> caroline: I think that this is the sort of thing that Sean and George will be able to help us with...
<walterbender> At the last marketing meeting, I tried to suggest that a message to potential donors was important...
<dfarning> Yes, I have worked with Sean before I have a great deal of respect for him
<walterbender> They are the third leg of a three-legged stool...
<tomeu> I don't have very clear yet all the kind of things we can ask to different kinds of partners, maybe we should have some discussion about that?
<walterbender> teachers/parents and developers being the others
<tomeu> we may lose some opportunities if not everybody have in mind what's needed
<walterbender> developers in the general sense of the community...
<walterbender> tomeu: very important topic. we have danced around it, but haven't got a concrete list

=-= homunq is now known as qqq

<dfarning> tomeu, How did you like being thrown in the hot seat at FOODEM?

=-= qqq is now known as rrr

<walterbender> of course, in kind engineering
<walterbender> and USB keys
<tomeu> dfarning: kind of fun

=-= rrr is now known as homunq

<walterbender> convening of meetings....
<walterbender> dfarning: he didn't dare use Turtle Art for his talk :)
<tomeu> dfarning: i basically tried to show them ways to deploy sugar, but perhaps there were other kinds of interesting arrangements
<dfarning> I will start a discussion of partners on iaep.
<walterbender> +1
<tomeu> next talk with be with TAP ;)
<walterbender> shall we move on?
<walterbender> A brief update of local labs?
<dfarning> It is something that we will have to revisit ever couple of months until we get it right
<dfarning> walterbender, yes
<walterbender> I had a talk with Miguel Brechner from LATU in Uruguay this week. He is supportive of the idea of an independent Sugar Labs in Uruguay
<walterbender> Meanwhile Pablo Flores et al. have been working on a formal launch
<walterbender> so there is good movement there.
<dfarning> walterbender, What actions should we take to help make that happen?
<walterbender> Hernan is making headway in Peru as well...
<walterbender> I think we should give feedback to these efforts, but there is little we can do directly except encourage
<dfarning> My gut instinct is just to get hell out of there way and let them do their thing:)
<walterbender> I think you are correct, but I think we should make it clear that we are available should they want to use us as sounding boards...
<dfarning> agree
<tomeu> as both peru and uruguay have lots of sugar deployed, they must be quite motivated
<walterbender> yes.
<tomeu> so we don't really need to motivate them
<tomeu> as opposed to an organization that is still thinking about deploying sugar
<walterbender> But they have questions, doubts about direction...
<walterbender> In regard to the latter, I am in conversations in many places--some quite new, including Saudi
<walterbender> And we are keeping the conversations going elsewhere...
<dfarning> walterbender, nice, you sell Sugar and we will work to make Sugar compelling enough to buy into.
<walterbender> I'll keep trying...
<dfarning> so will we...
<walterbender> Caroline and I are going to be blogging for Dell, which should give Sugar more exposure as well.
<caroline> I have an alert set up for Sugar on a Stick and I'm impressed at how much coveraget that interview last week is getting us.
<dfarning> can you send me a summary of that relationship i would like to add it to my list of potential OEM partners?
<walterbender> In the few minutes we have left, I'd like to just bring up the fact that there is contention regarding a few topics we may need to intervene on more directly...
<walterbender> there is not consensus on the logging of #Sugar and tempers are flaring
<walterbender> also, the build/bundle debate is getting uncivil at times...
<walterbender> just things to be aware of, not actionable yet, but we should help the community resolve these issues by helping the discourse move forward constructively
<walterbender> and I also wanted to ask erikos if there was anything we could do to help with 0.84
<walterbender> Anything else pressing?
<cjb> walterbender: I wonder whether we should just require people to be civil on the lists. (Ubuntu does this in their code of conduct.)
<cjb> It seems to have worked out pretty well for them. All the aggressive developers stay with Debian, where no-one's going to police their week-long flamewars. ;-)
<caroline> I think having a policy that requires people to be civil on the lists might be a good idea. I've certianly seen a few people being rude poison other communities.
<caroline> and it looks bad when people check out the community if there are posts with a bunch of F-words in them.
<caroline> not that it went that far this time. But I've seen that in other open source communities.
<cjb> http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct is the Ubuntu CoC, fwiw
<tomeu> CoC++
<tomeu> though the most effective way of calming people is making sure they are busy doing actual work ;)
<walterbender> I'd like to add some Maori community tradition as well...
<caroline> nice!
<walterbender> Chris, can you post a strawman on the wiki and lead the discussion?
<dfarning> Yes, the debian thread went too far, the individual involved has been removed from the .deb package flow.
<cjb> Yup, I can try.
<tomeu> I have some concerns about 0.84, because they way we set up the schedule, we were expecting to have gotten more feedback by now
<tomeu> specially regarding the UI changes
<tomeu> perhaps the lack of feedback mean people like them?
<tomeu> I have the informal impression that the code as of today is less buggy compared to similar moments in past releases
<tomeu> but that's an informal impression and I'm still worried that there are too few eyeballs
<walterbender> The major change seems to be the direct access to the recent documents...
<caroline> I wonder if we should add something specifically about not swearing. Being bi-coastal myself I know on the west coast its not that big a deal but I think in some of the communities we work with swearing can be very offensive.
<tomeu> I'm convinced we'll get that feedback, but that may be in a moment when fixing bugs gets more expensive?
<walterbender> which I am convinced si critical to the journal working well...
<tomeu> walterbender: plus the naming dialog, I guess?
<walterbender> the prompt when leaving an activity will be controversial, but I really like it.
<walterbender> yes, the naming dialog.
<tomeu> ok
<tomeu> I would have liked to have some of that controversy earlier
<walterbender> I got good vibes about it from the few teachers I spoke with...

|<-- befana has left freenode ("Leaving.")

<tomeu> the good news is that we have been disciplined about the feature freeze, so we get more stability. the bad news is that we may have left out one or more features that will be needed by someone planning to deploy 0.84
<walterbender> I think the discipline is a better course for us now...
<tomeu> that's not stressing in itself, might just mean that we need to start working on 0.86 earlier
<dfarning> tomeu, that is the nature of a release cycle. Hard decision need to be made.
<walterbender> I think the progress has been remarkable...
<walterbender> just look at the difference from 9 months ago when we started...
<tomeu> wonder where we'll be in 9 months ;)
<tomeu> anyone had recent news about resara?
  • walterbender consults crystal ball
<walterbender> no actually.
<walterbender> there are a few such companies we should be keeping a closer relationship with...
<tomeu> they seemed quite positive about some customers wanting to trial sugar
<walterbender> before we drift too far, can we formally close the slobs meeting?
<walterbender> a few todos for next time?
<walterbender> meet again in two weeks?
<cjb> I have an action item for the code of conduct thread
<walterbender> dfaring will report on finances...
<cjb> we could conduct the vote on slobs before the next meeting, if the data's available
<cjb> (for finances)
<walterbender> that is OK
<dfarning> cjb, lets just wait for the next meeting. That way we can develop a stable and sound system.
<walterbender> OK. thanks every.
<walterbender> I think this channel was scheduled for another meeting now???
<cjb> dfarning: ok, makes sense, thanks
<dfarning> nice work everyone, especially cjb. You are juggling a lot of balls right now:(
<dfarning> good bye