13:30:30 <melsakhawy> #startmeeting uc
13:30:30 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Apr  2 13:30:30 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is melsakhawy. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:30:31 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
13:30:33 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'uc'
13:30:41 <melsakhawy> #topic Roll Call
13:30:49 <jayahn> o/
13:31:13 <jayahn> hi
13:31:17 <melsakhawy> Good morning jayahn
13:31:26 <melsakhawy> *or evening :)
13:31:28 <jayahn> hey, good evening here actually :)
13:31:46 <melsakhawy> yeap
13:31:59 <melsakhawy> #topic Merger Business
13:33:04 <melsakhawy> so I wanted to go through the three options for UC/TC merger
13:33:23 <jayahn> yes.
13:33:31 <melsakhawy> per Thierry's email , there are two options with little, to no, impact on the bylaws
13:34:10 <jayahn> were there three options with no, little, and big impact on the bylaws
13:34:11 <jayahn> ?
13:34:37 <melsakhawy> and a heavyweight one that requires bylaws changes. This heavyweight option is the one where we changes the name of the merged committee
13:34:58 <melsakhawy> yeah you'r right , the big impact one is the one where we form an amalgmated steering comittee
13:35:46 <melsakhawy> what do you think ?
13:36:35 <jayahn> it seems bylaws change is really hard process.
13:37:11 <jayahn> if we can make sure there is no confusion, i would prefer option 1, which make things done.
13:38:17 <melsakhawy> Yeah I was with the same opinion as well
13:38:32 <jayahn> i am not sure though, having uc and tc name together would not create confusion among people.
13:39:12 <melsakhawy> It may , Thierry prposed to have a designated "5" people team under TC that do UC business
13:39:41 <jayahn> however, it would be better than option 2. if we removing "uc" word, even if it does not mean anything, it will have negative impact.
13:39:53 <melsakhawy> yeah agreed
13:40:00 <jayahn> so i prefere option 1 over option 2. even option 2 requires by laws change
13:40:37 <melsakhawy> Yeah that makes sense. I don' think that we need "5" desingnated members though
13:41:07 <melsakhawy> with the summarized set of goals , we can probably do that by reducing the number of "designated" members to 3
13:41:09 <jayahn> yeah, you are right. i also think we don't need "5" desingnated members
13:41:12 <melsakhawy> just to have a quoram
13:41:31 <jayahn> yah, i agreed
13:42:50 <jayahn> okay, so what it takes to officially change "designated" members to 3?
13:43:19 <melsakhawy> that's to be determined I think , but it'd be under the TC's governance to arrange that
13:43:46 <melsakhawy> those members I assume will be elected/appointed by the TC's regular nomination process
13:44:05 <melsakhawy> and then can be "designated" as UC responsible
13:44:47 <jayahn> then do we really need to keep ATC and AUC seperate?
13:44:58 <melsakhawy> Basically UC will exist, however it'll have empty memberships, with its business redirected to the TC's UC members
13:45:13 <melsakhawy> Good point , I think we do
13:45:49 <melsakhawy> AUC's have much less technical requirements to be on the list
13:46:28 <melsakhawy> for example, at one point completing the survey was a criteria to be on the AUC list, It's not any more
13:47:26 <jayahn> TC's regular nomination process.. will it be among ATC or AUC or both?
13:48:02 <jayahn> even if nomination/election process happens under TC, if we keep only AUC can vote, will it be same as now?
13:49:24 <melsakhawy> good point. I see your point now , either AUC and ATC can vote or the list has to be merged
13:49:51 <jayahn> yes
13:50:48 <melsakhawy> I am not sure though, with the UC business being entierly under TC that AUC can vote on TC members
13:51:51 <jayahn> i am not sure either.
13:52:07 <melsakhawy> okay , that's a good point to raise
13:52:42 <melsakhawy> I think what we want to ensure is that AUC is involved in UC's business
13:52:55 <melsakhawy> right now we do this through elections
13:53:32 <melsakhawy> but if the membership will be entirely TC, we need to ensure AUC also remains involved
13:55:00 <melsakhawy> the other thing we probably want to raise is the process for merger
13:55:21 <melsakhawy> shoudl we wait until upcoming elections and not hold one ? , or should we start asap
13:55:35 <jayahn> we probably need to compare the number of ATC vs. AUC. how big AUC can impact in terms of percentage?
13:56:13 <jayahn> hm..
13:56:59 <melsakhawy> true, but in principal , even if the niumbers do not sway the votes. AUCs are not involved in TC business so voting on TC members doesn't make sense
13:57:50 <jayahn> that is true.
13:58:57 <jayahn> do you think it will be good to  communicate our prefered merge option and our thought from ops-meetup and from all the user group coordinators?
14:00:12 <melsakhawy> yeah we probably should see our preferences from UC standpoint. Then we will communicate
14:00:29 <jayahn> okay
14:00:42 <melsakhawy> my personal merger option is to "not hold" an upcoming elections
14:01:18 <melsakhawy> so our aim remains at August/September , this way we don't rush into skupping important details
14:01:48 <jayahn> got it. i am with you on this
14:03:29 <melsakhawy> okay , so how about we spend some time to think about the AUC/ATC issue
14:03:47 <jayahn> yes, we need to think on this for sure.
14:04:01 <jayahn> I will also get some second opinion as well. :)
14:04:08 <melsakhawy> sounds good :)
14:04:19 <melsakhawy> and maybe by next week we share our thoughts ?
14:04:47 <jayahn> okay, sounds good. :)
14:05:12 <melsakhawy> okay perfect
14:05:17 <melsakhawy> #topic new business
14:06:34 <jayahn> do you have any new business? :)
14:06:42 <melsakhawy> the only other item I had in mind is the PTG ,I put my name in for attendance
14:07:06 <melsakhawy> it's virtual , hopefully by then we have a plan for the merger so we can present it
14:07:19 <melsakhawy> other than this I'm good
14:08:26 <melsakhawy> okay let's call it a meeting  then
14:08:27 <spotz> Hey all!
14:08:37 <melsakhawy> hey spotz
14:08:53 <jayahn> hey
14:09:52 <melsakhawy> okay see you next week then jayahn
14:09:57 <spotz> I just wanted to pop in as I finished something and see how everything was going
14:09:58 <melsakhawy> hav a good one !
14:10:03 <melsakhawy> #endmeeting