19:02:08 #startmeeting uc 19:02:09 Meeting started Mon Mar 27 19:02:08 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is ShillaSaebi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:02:10 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 19:02:13 The meeting name has been set to 'uc' 19:02:24 #chair emagana 19:02:24 Current chairs: ShillaSaebi emagana 19:02:25 You beat me ShillaSaebi 19:02:26 ;-) 19:02:31 #chair jproulx 19:02:32 Current chairs: ShillaSaebi emagana jproulx 19:02:46 :) 19:02:48 hello everyone 19:02:51 actually, I do not ming ShillaSaebi moderating this one :-) 19:02:51 hi all 19:03:00 mind* 19:03:10 Shamail may be a few min late 19:03:24 he has a conflict since daylight savings 19:03:41 I saw that we may want to look at a new meeting time since it seems to be a recurring conflict for him 19:04:08 I was thinking to propose to move the meeting back to one hour earlier, to 1800 UTC 19:04:15 Agenda for today #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee 19:04:25 I have also conflicts 19:04:32 ok 19:04:39 i am ok with moving it back to 1800 19:04:45 1800 would work for me too 19:04:51 mrhillsman: ? 19:05:50 ok shall we get started 19:06:17 #topic Recap UC session at the ops meetup 19:06:32 That was proposed by mrhillsman 19:06:44 who else attended the Ops Meetup? 19:06:49 i'm here, apologies 19:06:57 hi mrhillsman 19:07:13 what was proposed by me hehe 19:07:16 hey ShillaSaebi 19:07:31 recapping the UC session at the ops meetup 19:07:38 I was not there, anyone here that was there that can jump in? 19:08:08 oh, dang, thought shamail could make it :) 19:08:13 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MIL-ops-uc 19:08:43 I was there... thinking... It all kind of blurs together 19:08:59 key takeaways i think was myself and shamail had some actions by Boston 19:09:21 i believe shamail was going to be proactive around the wg/team doc 19:09:48 suggesting moving the uc meeting to weekly 19:09:54 +1 19:10:40 those were the main two 19:10:52 So proposal is to move UC IRC meeting to be every Monday at 1800 UTC? 19:11:04 I support the idea of weekly meetings and skipping whenever we do not have any topic to discuss.. 19:11:07 an hour earlier works for me 19:11:11 +1 emagana 19:11:33 +1 19:11:43 +1 19:12:03 Just take into account that we have a request for a new WG (Financial) whose chairs are in APAC time zone and we need to think about re-activating the APAC meetings 19:12:15 been sick past few days so pardon if i forget anything 19:12:29 Hi emagana 19:12:41 #agreed The UC meetings will be on a weekly basis and pushed back to 1800 on Mondays 19:13:03 are we in the topic of financial wg? 19:13:04 who can take the action of fixing up the reservation 19:13:13 i can do that 19:13:22 thx mrhillsman 19:13:24 is that the eavesdrop and wiki updates? 19:13:35 think that it 19:13:40 cool 19:13:55 no yet KaiLi 19:14:16 ok:) 19:14:42 Thank you for joining us KaiLi 19:14:52 #action mrhillsman to update the wiki and eavesdrop with the new meeting information 19:14:52 ^ 19:14:56 :) 19:15:27 ok should we move on to the next topic 19:15:36 yeap! 19:15:48 ^ 19:15:58 #topic Discuss mentoring plan for UC members (WG chair pairing, helping new WG members) 19:16:57 I think that was also suggested by Shamail 19:17:05 :) 19:17:32 i think before we can get to that we need to solidify the new wg/team doc 19:17:51 good idea nevertheless 19:17:59 ok lets skip until he joins, he will be here soon 19:18:03 +1 19:18:06 +1 19:18:14 #topic Review initial draft of official WGs guidelines 19:18:49 has everyone gotten a chance to look at the draft? 19:19:02 ...um...no yet... 19:19:04 mrhillsman: IMHO we should discuss the doc here initially but any decision should wait until Boston summit. I rather be in a room with most of the WGs members and discuss. 19:19:35 agreed 19:19:43 that was for mentoring though 19:20:02 where is that draft? 19:20:09 i did look over it but quickly 19:20:21 is there a draft available for viewing? 19:20:38 The document needs still a lot of work. Basically, right now only defines WGs and Teams and some general guidelines. I think we should go beyond that and define the expectations from the WGs 19:20:53 meh, paste issues 19:21:01 AndyU_: let me share 19:21:04 #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r3KwaG-SbvaKCuAE52XwPCF7cRGDrNRg6dUhPQWs0vU/edit 19:21:07 there you go 19:21:12 thx 19:21:12 thx 19:21:45 agreed emagana i pointed out at least a couple places i thought were ambiguous 19:21:56 or up for interpretation 19:22:10 What I want to agree today is the scope of the document 19:22:14 i see tom has added some comments recently :) 19:22:29 a. RE-Define the process for creating WGs 19:22:43 b. Define minimal structure of WGs 19:22:56 c. Define expectations and deliverables 19:23:22 d. Guidelines on communication and self-organization 19:24:32 we should have a clean up clause for determining when a WG/Team has ceased to be "active" 19:24:37 +1 19:24:51 +1 great idea 19:24:52 Should this also touch on guidelines for qualifying as an AUC? Thinking specifically of cases where IRC is not used. 19:25:27 if it's in there, sorry, didn't get to read it yet 19:25:30 AndyU_: think that would be part of "d" 19:25:41 got it 19:25:57 (don't know if it's there yet, but agree it should eb and think "d" is where it would fit) 19:26:29 ok 19:26:38 I also haven't had a chance to thoroughly review it 19:26:48 I will add a - d on the document 19:26:52 SO yeah I think emagana list + "e. sunset clause" is a good out line to start form 19:26:55 agree on teh scope emagana 19:27:03 agree on the scope as well 19:27:09 ...start from... 19:27:49 great.. let's add e 19:30:04 BTW Folks! 19:30:31 I have requested a session for UC and WGs to go over this document and all thos epoints 19:30:40 sweet 19:30:42 excellent 19:30:49 thanks emagana 19:30:59 #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/boston-2017/call-for-presentations/manage/18669/summary 19:31:22 "If the group is using other content collaboration then those artifacts should be linked in an etherpad and be publicly accessible" Might want to define 'publicly accessible'. Such as viewed by anonymous access? Or user can self-create an account on demand??? Also need to define the "content" that this applies to. Output of main meetings, sub-teams, everything? Lot's of wg's have docs in google docs for ex that are secur 19:32:42 Correct! AndyU_ I personally do not care about the tool as long as is accessible by anyone from anywhere 19:32:50 AndyU_ agree we definitely should be clear on those points 19:32:51 at anytime 19:33:15 Hi, all, excuse me... I will be away for a while. I will be back for the Financial topic soon. I need to find another place with wifi... 19:33:17 teh anonymous -vs- w/free account is an important discussion 19:33:22 The general inability to find artifacts is a pervasive problem I think. To the extend that you could provide guidance of a standard way for things to be found, it would be awesome. Like having every WG maintain and etherpad of etherpad links (with short desc). 19:34:30 +1 discoverability is very important 19:34:44 Some standard way in which people outside the secret and arcane lore can figure out what exists and how to see it ;-) 19:36:17 Yes, we should probably link to each WG/Team's pages (where ever they endup being) from the "offical" UC list of WG/Teams 19:38:08 I lost connection.. what did I miss? 19:38:17 definitely try to centralize as much of that as possible i would think 19:38:26 just for quick peek 19:38:35 and not having to go link diving 19:39:12 emagana if you see jproulx comment at 14:36 nothing 19:39:35 mrhillsman: Thanks. 19:39:48 did you mean 15:36 19:39:50 Well, I think we have a good baseline for the document. Maybe we should working on it 19:40:00 and move on to the next topic 19:40:02 yes 19:40:04 right. some common root convention. for any wg you look and from there you have traceability to any important arifact 19:40:17 yep 19:40:33 #topic Financial WG proposal 19:40:35 hehe, yes ShillaSaebi 19:40:40 Kaili are you back? 19:40:48 good 19:40:50 yes 19:40:57 great 19:41:18 Financial WG request: #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a5PGnOIGBzONGFlkSF766piGtTX9WdR6ngQSfHwq_Cw/edit?usp=sharing 19:41:22 I am here. Sorry that for the financial WG, we would like to hold it for a while 19:41:51 Hi all. Thought I would listen in for this topic 19:42:03 * shamail sneaks in 19:42:05 Hi and welcome AlanClark 19:42:05 hey there AlanClark 19:42:06 Kaili_ can you clarify? What do you mean by hold it? 19:42:13 Hi AlanClark and shamail 19:42:14 HI AlanClark & shamail 19:42:25 Yes, KaiLI_ I have the same question 19:42:25 hey shamail 19:42:32 ^ 19:42:32 Hi everyone 19:42:40 who is shamail? ;-) 19:42:46 hehe 19:42:57 A person who shows up 1 hour early and then 38 minutes late. 19:43:10 There are some new big banks would like to join us , we think we need more time to align with them for the statement of this WG 19:43:11 DST victim 19:44:47 KaiLI_: Do you anticipate change in the charter? Would it be possible to start having meetings and change the mission in the open? 19:45:20 yes, I was one of the charter authors 19:45:33 This way you could start the process towards becoming a WG and hopefully attract additional members while still defining the charter through changes as members join and you have discussions. 19:46:00 I second shamail 19:46:07 I think is a good idea KaiLI_ 19:46:07 i third shamail 19:46:36 The UC role is to support all WGs. Let us know how we can help 19:46:44 agreed, KaiLI_ do what you think best, but our process shoudln't hinder you from chaning things as you go if need be 19:47:16 +1 19:47:27 thanks jproulx 19:47:35 Does the UC have contacts that we should invite to the discussions? 19:48:02 we don't want to miss anyone who would like to be included 19:48:51 i definitely have a few who would like to get involved 19:48:58 i fourth shamail 19:49:19 KaiLI_: sometimes the best way to get additional people involved is to start the working group and then there's a clear venue for them to join 19:49:22 I used to know someone from Bank of America. I will reach out 19:49:35 i think the benefit of having the discussion out in the open ... what jbryce said :) 19:49:41 Justin in Enterprise WG might be interested too 19:51:30 There is not rush for deciding anything today. We have already booked a WG session in Boston for the Financial. 19:52:04 back 19:52:13 wb 19:52:20 That's the meeting we want to point people to 19:52:35 Maybe we should assign a UC member to work closely with KaiLI_ and the rest of the WG members to help on the on-boarding/ kick off process. 19:52:46 jbryce, agree with you , I would like to bring this message to other charter 19:52:55 authors 19:53:05 they should be here tonight. 19:53:06 #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/boston-2017/summit-schedule/events/18655/financial-wg-state-of-the-union 19:53:25 I will sync with your guys later, maybe next uc meeting 19:53:34 +1 19:53:40 Sounds great 19:53:41 sounds good KaiLI_ 19:54:05 I have a proposal 19:54:06 thanks :) 19:54:08 awesome 19:54:18 anything else on the financial wg topic? 19:54:41 nothing from me 19:54:58 thanks guys:) 19:55:06 I want to nominate Tom F. to help the Financial WG to have a successful kick off. Tom is in the same time zone and that will help a lot. 19:55:10 thank you KaiLI_ 19:55:20 emagana this is true 19:55:48 +1 to volunteer Tom (who's not here) 19:56:05 😅 19:56:09 anyone want to take the task of asking Tom? 19:56:09 +1 if he agrees 19:56:18 :) 19:56:19 jproulx: We call it at Workday: "voluntold" 19:56:21 I know tom well. I will reach him for helps after this meeting:) 19:56:26 ok 19:56:29 awesome 19:56:32 KaiLI_: awesome! 19:56:42 I will also continue to support them 19:56:50 #action KaiLI_ to reach out to Tom to help with onboarding financial WG 19:56:57 ditto 19:57:02 Thanks AlanClark 19:57:09 ^ 19:57:12 #topic open discussion 19:57:37 we have a few min to discuss anything, feel free to bring it up now 19:58:09 maybe shamial's mentoring plan we skipped earlier? 19:58:15 sure 19:58:16 ^ 19:58:21 in 2 minutes? 19:58:28 i need a mentor ;) 19:58:30 maybe we should wait to the next week? 19:58:30 yeah proably not ;) 19:58:39 agreed 19:58:39 shamail one of the topics was to discuss mentoring plan for UC members 19:58:45 maybe we can touch on it at the next meeting 19:59:06 +1 to put mentoring on next meeting (next monday 1800 UTC) 19:59:09 we can make sure its added to the agenda 19:59:12 cool 19:59:16 anything else anyone wants to bring up? 19:59:19 We can defer to a future meeting but the plan was in general to help find existing WG sponsors for newcomers to WG new working groups in general 19:59:24 everyone clear on the dinner and joint meeting at the boston summit? 19:59:47 AlanClark: yup, I'll be at both 19:59:51 i am AlanClark - accepted invite to dinner 19:59:54 UC in the proposal meant teams within UC 20:00:23 AlanClark yes 20:00:30 I'll try to be there AlanClark 20:00:36 alright everyone, we are at time 20:00:38 thx for chairing ShillaSaebi :) 20:00:42 thank you for joining 20:00:42 thanks all 20:00:43 anytime! 20:00:44 Thanks! 20:00:48 thanks all 20:00:53 #endmeeting