10:02:37 #startmeeting General_IRC_meeting_11_March_2015 10:02:37 Meeting started Wed Mar 11 10:02:37 2015 UTC. The chair is slef. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 10:02:37 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 10:02:37 The meeting name has been set to 'general_irc_meeting_11_march_2015' 10:02:46 #topic 1. Introductions 10:03:06 Hello, good time-zone-appropriate-greeting and welcome 10:03:19 please introduce yourself and please use "#info" in front of your introduction to have it show up in the automatic minutes 10:03:24 #info Robin Sheat, Catalyst IT, Wellington NZ 10:03:26 #info Joann Ransom, Horowhenua, NZ 10:03:27 #info Jonathan Druart, BibLibre 10:03:28 #info David Nind, Wellington, New Zealand 10:03:29 #info Mirko Tietgen, Berlin, Germany 10:03:44 #info Olugbenga Adara Projektlink Konsult, Ibadan, Nigeria 10:03:45 #info MJ Ray, member of software.coop, England 10:03:45 #info Magnus Enger, Libriotech, Norway 10:03:56 #info Matthias Meusburger, biblibre, France 10:04:13 Thomas Dukleth, Agogme, New York City, (finally warm enough to recover from freezing illness) 10:04:17 #info Tunji Adepeju Projektlink Konsult , Ibadan, Nigeria 10:04:35 #info Josef Moravec, Municipal Library, Ústí nad Orlicí, Czech Republic 10:04:36 #info Marc Véron, marc veron ag, member of Koha Support Schweiz, Switzerland 10:04:42 ok - introductions can be added any time as people arrive but I'll move on in a minute 10:04:43 Magnuse: First time at meeting for Teejay :) 10:05:08 welcome, Teejay 10:05:12 I see I defeated wahanui by accident... actually, where is wahanui? 10:05:19 #info Mason James, NZ 10:05:22 #info Kjetil JD / akafred, Oslo Public Library, Norway 10:05:28 #info Michal Denar, Municipal Library, Ceska Trebova, Czech Republic 10:05:53 #topic 2. Announcements (non-release) 10:06:01 Do we have any? None on the agenda... 10:06:43 welcome Teejay! :-) 10:06:52 #info Martin Renvoize, PTFS Europe 10:07:05 house-keeping note - if you want to make me wait a minute so you can say something, enter something short like ! on a line by itself first - I can't tell if you're typing otherwise 10:07:34 shall we move on? 10:07:41 ! 10:07:44 yes 10:07:47 :) 10:07:51 heh 10:08:03 #topic 3. Update on releases 10:08:21 #info Benjamin Rokseth, Oslo Public Library 10:08:22 who can do these? 10:09:30 wahanui: welcome back 10:09:30 I was trapped in a maze of twisty, turny passages, all alike. 10:09:45 no release mamanegrs 10:10:02 #info 3.18.4 was released on 23 Feb 10:10:12 #info 3.16.8 was released on 3 Mar 10:10:24 #info Alex Sassmannshausen, PTFS Europe, UK 10:10:24 10:10:29 poor wahanui 10:10:29 Will he ever win? 10:10:30 mtj: ^ 10:10:41 #info 3.18.4 was a security fix release 10:11:23 #info http://koha-community.org/ai1ec_event/4517-2/?instance_id=101 suggests a new stable release on 22nd 10:11:45 anyone got news on that? Will it include the security fix from 3.18.4 or was that 3.18-only? 10:12:12 * slef digs 10:12:37 hmm, no security patches for 3.16.8, afaik 10:12:46 3.14 and 3.16 need the fix 10:13:15 any volunteers to backport? 10:13:19 bug 12594 10:13:19 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=12594 minor, P5 - low, ---, m.de.rooy, ASSIGNED , Get rid of z3950random 10:13:37 bug 12954 10:13:37 04Bug http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=12954 is not accessible. 10:13:46 but you can't display it like that 10:13:53 until the fix is backported at least 10:14:03 ah, typo on http://koha-community.org/koha-3-18-4-released/ then 10:14:06 not my rule but that's how it is 10:14:25 magnuse: good spot. Link is correct though. 10:14:30 it says 12594 but links to http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=12954 10:14:30 04Bug 12954: is not accessible. 10:14:53 anyone got a web login handy to fix that? 10:14:59 yeah, that's a nasty one that should be fixed 10:15:06 slef: i do, what do I need to do? 10:15:07 oh 10:15:13 sorry, not to that 10:15:36 slef: do you want me to switch the bug from Koha security to Koha? 10:15:43 Joubu: not until backported no 10:15:46 Joubu: it's still an active issue 10:15:48 hmm, i think i need to backport that one, still 10:15:53 @later tell rangi http://koha-community.org/koha-3-18-4-released/ says bug number 12594 for the security fix, but links to 12954 10:15:53 magnuse: The operation succeeded. 10:15:56 I'd like someone to fix the typo on http://koha-community.org/koha-3-18-4-released/ 10:16:21 mtj: one of us backport, the other reviews the patch? 10:16:51 I think I will make the time to work on this too 10:17:27 #action someone to fix typo on http://koha-community.org/koha-3-18-4-released/ 10:17:42 slef: sounds good 10:17:57 #action mtj and slef to backport bug 12954 if no-one does it faster 10:18:20 OK - any more release updates or shall we move on? 10:18:33 afaik, thats it for me slef 10:19:10 #topic 4. KohaCon15 10:19:10 does not seem like other release managers/maintainers are around 10:19:42 As an aside, it would be really helpful if there were nicknames on the agenda items. 10:19:43 fridolin is busy at the moment, I asked him to backport the bug fix 10:19:54 #info Bob Birchall, Calyx - sorry I'm late 10:19:55 Anyone got news about kohacon15? 10:20:12 no worries BobB. Hi. Introductions are good at any point in the meeting IMO. 10:20:19 Yes. First thanks for welcoming Teejay 10:20:21 slef: how do you mean? like who is supposed to tell something? 10:20:38 hi Teejay :) 10:20:51 drojf: yes, that sort of thing, or who wants a question asked 10:20:56 #thank you 10:20:57 Kohacon15 registration now open 10:21:00 #info Kohacon15 registration and Call for Papers are now open 10:21:07 #link http://kohacon15.projektlinkkonsult.com/registration/ 10:21:13 #link http://kohacon15.projektlinkkonsult.com/call-for-papers/ 10:21:26 oadara: for how long are they open? 10:21:51 #info Colin Campbell PTFS Europe 10:21:52 #info Olli-Antti Kivilahti, Vaara-kirjastot Finland 10:22:01 Not decided on that yet 10:22:10 open to suggestions 10:22:34 Any suggestions? 10:22:34 Any suggestions are welcome. 10:22:35 Have 4 people register so far 10:23:29 I think we kept kohacon12 registration open until workers left their desks the Friday before the event. I don't know if that's possible with the prepayment for meals/rooms? 10:24:16 We closed papers 20 April for a start date of 5 June... so what's that? 6 weeks before? 10:24:28 AUGUST 31 was given by IITA venue and accommodation 10:24:38 slef : That would not be possible but we can look at how close we can get to the date 10:26:04 International participants would need visa processed too so the earlier the registration, the better 10:26:13 If it's 31 Aug, could that be the deadline for both papers and registration? Anyway, I will note it as an idea and leave it to you of course 10:26:35 #idea deadline for both papers and registration as close to 31 Aug as possible 10:26:43 #info International participants would need visa processed too so the earlier the registration, the better 10:27:15 That was the same for international participants in kohacon12 too - last successful registration needing a visa was about 25th April IIRC. 10:27:30 Any other news or shall we move on? 10:27:36 slef : noted 10:27:49 visa requirement and procedure could be included on registration page ... 10:27:50 Thank you all 10:28:00 oadara or Teejay: are there food options for people with allergies? like lactose or gluten free 10:28:08 Yes 10:28:09 #idea please could visa requirement and procedure be linked from http://kohacon15.projektlinkkonsult.com/registration/ 10:28:30 http://kohacon15.projektlinkkonsult.com/kohacon15-registration-form/ has a link - oops 10:28:32 But we need to notify the IaiTA in advance 10:28:42 but I think it would be good to show it on the first page 10:28:49 it's a big problem for people who need visas 10:29:14 all ideas noted for action 10:30:01 processing the visa itself should not be difficult 10:30:02 #idea add information about how best to notify organisers/IaiTA in advance about special requirements (allergies or similar) 10:30:57 but we will need to write letters for the visa application hence need to start the process early 10:31:29 oadara: is a tourist visa OK because delegates are not being employed locally, or should it be a business visa? 10:31:58 tourist is ok 10:32:00 business visa are only for business men 10:32:26 some places have conference visas 10:32:31 drojf: most places that is so, but I think a few are different. 10:32:31 (I had to get one for India) 10:32:34 drojf : :-) 10:32:43 slef: i meant it's not for women ;) 10:33:01 #info oadara says tourist visa is OK 10:33:04 * slef blames oadara ;) 10:33:11 drojf: ohhhh stop it 10:33:19 anything else or shall we move on? 10:33:36 slef: its what the website says 10:33:54 * slef hands that can of worms back to drojf 10:35:08 #topic 5. KohaCon16 - when do we start soliciting for bids? 10:35:46 #info We started KohaCon15 process in May 2014 10:36:32 It looks like thd did some of the kick-off work. Any opinions on when we should start for next year? 10:36:58 did the timing work last time? 10:37:23 The real work was encouraging people to bid. 10:37:41 I don't remember if the timing worked. Does anyone? 10:37:46 Especially, people who may have bid in the past but were not selected. 10:38:51 The timing was only problematic too the extent that there may not have been the degree of interest in bidding to host KohaCon as had been the case in the past. 10:39:02 s/too/to/ 10:39:32 So should we change the timing this year or go with similar again? 10:39:58 Maybe we could start a month earlier. 10:39:59 i see that we have voted end of september, beginning of october a few times. so starting bid in may makes sense to me 10:40:12 but it does not hurt to start sooner i guess 10:40:28 Maybe we could start a month earlier for soliciting bids. 10:40:38 do you want e to move that? 10:40:46 or just +1 10:40:47 Voting in September seems OK. 10:41:16 #startvote Shall we solicit Kohacon16 bids in April, with voting in September? 10:41:16 Begin voting on: Shall we solicit Kohacon16 bids in April, with voting in September? Valid vote options are Yes, No. 10:41:16 Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. 10:41:20 yep, about a year to prepare after winning (depending on actual dates proposed) 10:41:29 +1 10:41:40 #vote Yes 10:41:45 #vote Yes 10:41:45 #vote yes 10:41:54 #vote yes 10:41:55 it appears huginn requires #vote Yes - we could hack that, you know ;) 10:41:56 #vote yes 10:41:58 #vote yes 10:41:59 #vote Yes 10:42:00 #vote yes 10:42:02 #vote yes 10:42:13 #vote Yes 10:42:19 #vote yes 10:42:22 #vote Yes 10:42:26 #vote yes 10:43:04 #endvote 10:43:04 Voted on "Shall we solicit Kohacon16 bids in April, with voting in September?" Results are 10:43:11 * slef glares at huginn 10:43:22 #agreed solicit Kohacon16 bids in April, with voting in September 10:43:39 results are… ? 10:43:40 If anyone knows what broke there, please tell someone who can fix huginn ;) 10:43:43 :D 10:43:45 @more 10:43:45 eythian_: Error: You haven't asked me a command; perhaps you want to see someone else's more. To do so, call this command with that person's nick. 10:44:09 #topic 6. Release team for 3.22 - when do we hold the elections? 10:44:11 i count 13 yes and 0 no 10:44:23 drojf: I only saw yes, so I #agreed it 10:44:46 makes sense 10:44:47 :) 10:44:49 Opinions on release team election timing? What was done recently and did it work? 10:45:36 #info 3.20 elections were in November 2014 10:45:37 when is 3.20 to be released? april? may? 10:45:50 #info 3.18 elections were in April 2014 10:45:51 For the last two releases the elections were held in the month before the new release, or just before the release 10:45:56 may i think? 10:46:14 if tcohen sticks to tradition 10:46:30 april would be to soon to get a new team ;) 10:46:36 So we'd be expecting elections next month? 10:47:04 27 October 2014 wiki nominations opened for 3.20 10:47:25 17 March 2014 wiki nominations opened for 3.18 10:47:50 drojf: why? 10:48:04 magnuse: are you suggesting an April vote for a team to take its place from 22 May, the release date? 10:48:15 * thd forgot info on his introduction 10:48:30 #info Thomas Dukleth, Agogme, New York City, (finally warm enough to recover from freezing illness) 10:48:48 slef: i mean a release in april would be early, because we should have a team for 3.22 at that point i suppose 10:48:59 voting in april seems fine to me 10:49:00 Would suggest nominations open two months before, with the election held at the general IRC meeting in the month of the new release 10:49:25 So nominations can be opened pretty much now? 10:49:27 BobB: sounds good to me 10:49:34 #startvote Open nominations immediately with voting in...? April, May 10:49:34 Begin voting on: Open nominations immediately with voting in...? Valid vote options are April, May. 10:49:34 Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. 10:49:40 * slef tries huginn again 10:49:57 #vote April 10:50:09 #vote April 10:50:12 #vote May 10:50:13 #vote April 10:50:14 #vote May 10:50:14 #vote May 10:50:14 #vote April 10:50:21 #vote May 10:50:30 #vote May 10:50:35 #vote April 10:50:39 #vote May 10:50:43 #vote May 10:51:10 #showvote 10:51:10 May (7): magnuse, davidnind, joann, akafred, mveron, thd, drojf 10:51:10 April (5): Joubu, eythian_, matts, BobB, m23 10:51:11 may 7, april 5. so far. i think 10:51:18 heh 10:51:46 Would anyone like to explain their reason for one over the other? 10:51:51 If we had put the question a month ago I might have cast my vote differently. 10:52:04 a reason for April is sometimes not all roles are filled at time of voting, and it leaves time to hunt up a voluteer 10:52:11 I propose midnight UTC on May 1 :) 10:52:12 see if we can persuade anyone to change which lobby they're in 10:52:26 joubu +1 10:52:36 i voted may so i have more tie so see if i will volunteer for something 10:52:37 April is so soon. I think it is a big commitment to stand for release manager and it is helpful to see a deveopment proposal. 10:52:47 I am changing by the argument from BobB 10:52:51 i was thinking it is good to have a couple of months to find volunteers 10:52:52 #vote April 10:53:04 *more time 10:53:12 Which really means voting in April and May 10:53:17 * magnuse agrees with joann 10:53:32 joann makes a good point 10:53:37 Basically we have voted over two months for a while as I recall. 10:53:52 * mveron agrees with joann as well 10:54:06 * BobB agrees April is soon 10:54:21 If you go for April then that is about a month for nominations, with the elections at the April general IRC meeting - too soon 10:54:21 Christmas is soon too :) 10:54:26 BobB are you changing your argument? 10:54:33 So I think I'm hearing a vote for desired/contested positions in April, with any vacancies filled by further encouragement with another vote in May? 10:54:47 yes ok 10:54:48 should we recast the vote 10:54:55 #vote May 10:55:02 #vote May 10:55:06 you can recast your votes at any time until I say endvote 10:55:11 so did everyone change their vote now? ^^ 10:55:12 #vote may 10:55:15 #showvote 10:55:15 May (8): magnuse, davidnind, joann, akafred, BobB, mveron, thd, drojf 10:55:15 April (4): Joubu, matts, m23, eythian_ 10:55:18 #vote May 10:55:22 #vote May 10:55:29 #vote May 10:55:38 OK my hearing is poor :) 10:55:53 in the time it took me to type, discussion moved on 10:56:12 Creating roles for 3.22 page now 10:56:15 Would Joubu or matts like to argue for April more? 10:56:29 davidnind++ 10:56:45 slef: actually I don't care :) 10:57:05 I am fine with May 10:57:08 ok... I'm about to close the vote 10:57:15 okay for me as well 10:57:18 Joubu abstains :) 10:57:30 #endvote 10:57:30 Voted on "Open nominations immediately with voting in...?" Results are 10:57:30 May (11): magnuse, davidnind, joann, josef_moravec, akafred, BobB, eythian_, mveron, thd, drojf, m23 10:57:30 April (2): Joubu, matts 10:57:40 shall we move on? 10:57:49 #topic 7. A fund for Koha development 10:58:10 joann or BobB would you like to introduce this? 10:58:21 sure 10:58:21 #link http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/2015-March/042249.html 10:58:28 #link http://kete.library.org.nz/site/documents/show/367-draft-mou-for-koha-fund 10:58:32 the sneaky conspirators 10:58:53 #info the idea is to have a Fund that can receive donations to fund Koha development 10:59:00 at KohaCon the proposal was discussed that it would be cool if there was a way / mechanism for donations to fund koha development 10:59:11 #info THT have very kindly agreed to host the Fund 10:59:28 #info and the draft MOU describes at a high level how it will work 10:59:35 horowhenua trust dont want to interfere too much 11:00:13 so the grant comittee and fundraising committee would be driven by the koha commnity 11:00:26 So the onus is on the community to have a Fundraising Committee (or group, or even an agenda item at these meetings) to make this work 11:00:35 with admin support from THT 11:00:58 lots of work to be done stil on the grants committee etc, but the proposed mou would allow a mechanism to get us started 11:01:11 start collecting donations 11:01:34 any questions? 11:01:35 a couple of vendors have already indicated they want to contribute 11:01:40 sounds good to me 11:02:27 sounds good to me too 11:02:33 One question 11:02:33 One question is whether anybody cares to make a committment to revise the schema to match 11:03:01 relevant as usual, wahanui 11:03:01 BobB: i'm not following you... 11:03:07 The grants committee ... shouldn't it have some appointments for the community as a whole to decide? 11:03:20 absolutely. 11:03:33 akafred that is very open at the moment 11:03:44 the community would take recomendations to THT trustees to appoit 11:03:59 the idea though is for grants committee members to come (mostly, at least) from the community, not from the Trust 11:04:16 trustees have no desire to dominate or dictate but to enable 11:04:21 but it is accountable to the Trust, who need advice before distributing hte money 11:04:56 So what I expect is: community decides who goes on teh committee 11:04:59 i see it that the community wil work out the bylaws for the grants committee - which tht adopt 11:05:12 Fundraising committee makes a recommendation to THT finance committee 11:05:20 who then appoints the grants committee 11:05:28 and trust might like 1 person on it - but possibly not too 11:05:37 Just a note: I feel it's a bit unclear for the grants subcommittee to not be a subset of the finance committee - I could be wrong but I think practice on that varies between places and we'd usually call a delegated body with members that are not members of the delegating body a "working group" or similar - but I bow to HLT's knowledge of its own governing law of course. 11:05:42 * slef finishes his essay 11:05:45 who then make recommedations about who/whatto fund 11:06:14 and the Trust approves the recommendations and sends the cheques (as it were) 11:06:24 also the naming in the PDF isn't consistent: in places, it's Grants sub-committee and in others, it's Grants Committee 11:06:38 sub committee of THT by appointment and secondment is fine 11:06:58 typo slef, will fix that 11:07:03 and ive gone over the document a dozen times slef 11:07:09 yeah, just waving that at you 11:07:20 (just to keep us humble) 11:07:25 I think it is a bit unclear how the community can influence grants, but I acknowledge this is way outside my area of expertise. 11:07:40 more general question: is it supposed to be transparent about what goes in, what goes out? or is there more "woah huge grant from xy" and unknown numbers coming up? 11:07:49 I think it'd help if 6.11 made it clear that the Grants $whatever will contain non-HLTers 11:08:14 I think that is reasonale slef 11:08:27 hlt dont have the expertise or desire 11:08:37 A process like the one used to choose RMs or somthing perhaps. 11:08:47 THT doesn't want to have to be involved in the decision making, so ... 11:09:00 rubber stamping 11:09:08 a mechanism is needed for the community to provide people to make grants decisions ... 11:09:27 and all the MOU requires is that the group is not dominated by any organisation 11:09:38 akafred: I've been involved in both successful and abysmal grant-making processes from both sides. I think it's best to delegate it to people with some published rules and transparent process else it easily becomes disruptive noisy mob rule. 11:09:40 but it is open to the community to make more rules about appointments 11:09:54 to ensure things are transparent and there is accountability 11:10:19 * akafred likes published rules and transparent process 11:10:24 when we start handing out money, there is potential for disagreement, jealousy, all the worst things to come out 11:10:29 yay for that 11:10:34 tht is audited by audit nz - govt auditors. every thing is highly transparent - has to be 11:10:38 akafred: I hope that the process of participation in at least voicing an opinion about how to spend any money would be more inclusive than selecting RM etc. has been in practise. 11:10:43 so we are trying to set up a structure that at least keeps things open 11:10:56 Would people from "Listed Koha Support Company"s on either committee be seen as a conflict of interest by NZ law? 11:11:07 the mou is the first step. 11:11:37 that is why we limited it to 1 place - so can only ever be 1 vote 11:11:44 re 11:12:01 sorry i was in a call conf 11:12:24 yay for transparency 11:12:47 joann, BobB: ok, so what are we looking for now? General "yes, take this forwards" or more specifics? Nominations here and now, or next month, or at the same time as the release team election, or later? 11:12:50 so if we can get suport here today, and 4 people who are nomited by the community - and accept - to ener into this agreement on behalf of the comunity, i will set up a bank account, 11:12:52 I assume anyone with a conflict of interest at a meeting would declare it, but the rules can mandate that if we wish 11:13:07 and ythe community will need to start thinking about the grants committee make up and rules 11:13:42 #info We seek endorsement of the community entering into the MOU with HLT, first 11:13:57 I support this, it is a very positive move 11:14:00 #info and second, some names to be signatories on behalf of the community 11:14:11 that then allows fundraising to begin 11:14:28 there is then a safe and accountable bank account for money to be received into 11:14:50 more thought is needed about getting the money back out, more rules probably 11:15:00 but that is less urgent 11:15:13 OK, I think there are two obvious groups of existing role-holders for signatories... RMs who we trust with our assets already; and kohacon organisers who we trusted with money already (and our users/developers safety!). 11:15:15 what we want now is to be able to get fundraising started 11:15:50 I would like to suggest Chris Cormack as one signatory 11:15:51 Does anyone want to make other suggestions for signatories? 11:15:53 * mveron thinks that the bank account should be published on the Koha About page 11:16:00 and Bob Birchall as another 11:16:31 joann: rangi was(is?) a RM and a former kohacon organiser so would fit both 11:16:43 mveron what do you mean by 'bank account should be published'? 11:16:44 Suggestions from me - Bob, Chris,Galen, Paul, Nicole? subject to agreeing 11:16:50 oh ok so names? 11:16:55 So is tcohen 11:16:58 if you mean the bank balance, there is provision inthe MOU for reporting that 11:17:19 BobB: In staff client - to gt donations. 11:17:23 get 11:17:24 I have spoken with him today, and if the community was happy for him to do this he will happily be a signatory. 11:17:32 we can do it by naming but I feel doing that in 0 hours is a bit risky 11:17:35 useful too coz he is an hour away from the trust if we ned face to face 11:17:48 and bob is only 3 hours away :) 11:17:51 ah ok mveron, good idea 11:17:51 if no-one else has a problem with 0-hour naming, I'll stand aside, though 11:17:58 joann: also we don't have enough exuses for trips to levin :) 11:18:05 lol 11:18:49 slef: "0 hours"? 11:18:57 here and now 11:19:02 bob, chris, galen, paul (the david nind combo) 11:19:03 like without warning 11:19:08 The purpose of the fund eythian_ is definitely not to fund the international travel of committee members :) 11:19:17 absolutely not 11:19:25 BobB: levin is not so international for me... 11:19:31 joann: with nengard asked next if any of those four are not willing? 11:19:40 absolutely 11:19:42 but you are special, eythian_ :) 11:19:45 is that OK davidnind ? 11:20:02 works for me 11:20:13 is anhyone unhappy? 11:20:29 slef: I agree this sounds a little rushed 11:20:37 i think that is happening pretty fast now and with not too many people taking part 11:20:59 I've said why I'm uncomfortable with this. 11:21:09 we mentioned it after argentina and in an ir meting but yes, its been quiet since. 11:21:24 it would seem reasonable to give it a couple of days, given timezones will make responses/acceptances a little slow anyway. 11:21:27 we dont have a deadline to reach 11:21:42 there was a long paper by bag after Koha 11:21:44 We've mentioned something ever since Edinburgh at least so doing this overnight now feels a bit rushed 11:21:46 getting attention to an issue is always the problem more than the time period passed. 11:21:47 Con 11:21:48 Why not decide now and send a message to the mailing list? If somebody disagrees he/she could ask for an other vote. 11:22:21 This basically just sets up a bank account. 11:22:32 mveron: that's a bit like "this is what we want. Does anyone dare oppose us?" like bad old Kings. 11:22:43 nothing can happen until the oha community get the grants committee sorted out 11:22:44 I see this as merely one avenue of funding for which many need to be pursued. 11:22:49 if we delay this now, what will anyone actually do? 11:22:54 that is not already done? 11:23:03 i dont want to be a bad old king ;) 11:23:04 mveron: I'd prefer to call for nominations, maybe with a short deadline. We may end up with the same names anyway. 11:23:20 I agree totally with Bob 11:23:27 slef: Agree... 11:23:27 hmmm... agree is not the best approach 11:23:34 but also we have to lose except time 11:23:41 oops 11:23:43 Some granting organisations would never be able to grant to HLT where HLT is foreign and other models will be needed to pursue those. 11:23:47 nothing to lose but time 11:24:06 yes thd that is true ... 11:24:11 i would love to see the donations coming in starting yesterday, but i tend to agree with slef 11:24:26 whats another week or two 11:24:36 but there have been numerous past attempts to form a US 501 foundation taht have not succeeded 11:24:39 1 week, let's keep some momentum now you've made it 11:24:42 i'd prefer a split. like, vote/decide to set up the account and follow the mou now, noinate/vote on people withing a certain time span 11:24:54 this approach is effective and inexpensive 11:25:01 thd: that seems like an issue that would occur no matter where it was actually hosted 11:25:14 drojf: that works for me 11:25:37 Consequently, I see no reason not to go forward with HLT quickly with the understanding that the community can always propose revisions to the bylaws and members of the HLT grants committee. 11:25:39 drojf: Good idea 11:25:46 we cangt sign the mou without signatories who represent and are supported by the commnity 11:25:51 I think we want people initially that the community trusts and respects to do the right thing, all of those nominated would definitely qualify (not that there aren't others as well) 11:26:10 ! 11:26:11 I really don't care whose names are on the MOU, but I would like the MOU itself to be endorsed, so that fundraising can begin 11:26:40 How about nominate the davidnind four for the MOU but call for nominations for the fundraising committee at the same time as the release team? 11:26:44 we can't put names on the MOU before asking them, though? 11:26:47 I have 3 vendors who want to contribute now 11:26:52 eythian_: Yes, the issue I mentioned about foreign grantors is unavoidable, therefore, should have no effect on funding via HLT. 11:26:55 oh yeah subject to their agreement 11:26:58 i have asked chris, bob is here 11:27:02 joann: count me in as well :-) 11:27:07 paul is online now - or was 11:27:20 paul_p_: oi! Are you willing to sign your life away? ;) 11:27:25 Community control will be exercised by the Fundraising Committe - which is a whole new discussion 11:27:26 lol 11:27:27 4 vendors (thank you magnus) 11:27:31 take as much time as you like for that 11:27:53 ok, just documenting this: 11:28:22 #startvote Nominate rangi BobB magnuse paul_p_ to sign the MOU on our behalf and call for nominations to the fundraising committee ASAP? Yes, No 11:28:22 Begin voting on: Nominate rangi BobB magnuse paul_p_ to sign the MOU on our behalf and call for nominations to the fundraising committee ASAP? Valid vote options are Yes, No. 11:28:22 Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. 11:28:25 * paul_p_ reading the backlog, and proud to discover he is "one of the davidnind four" :D 11:28:47 um, not me, i think? 11:28:48 #vote Yes 11:28:48 #vote Yes 11:28:56 #vote yes 11:29:06 #vote Yes 11:29:07 #vote yes 11:29:07 oy! 11:29:12 #vote Yes 11:29:16 magnuse: I changed it because you're here and Galen/Nicole aren't. Are you unwilling? Sorry :( 11:29:19 #vote Yes 11:29:37 well, i havn't actually read the MOU... 11:29:38 Magnus wil do ::D 11:29:43 * BobB does not want to vote for himself as signatory, but votes in favour of the MOU being signed 11:29:46 I misunderstood " joann: count me in as well :-)" 11:29:50 #vote Yes 11:29:51 #vote Yes 11:29:51 better read it sunshine! 11:30:26 joann said "I have 3 vendors who want to contribute now" - it hought that meant want to contribute financially 11:30:33 yeah I see now 11:30:38 sorry 11:30:39 heh i read it like slef 11:30:43 so we start over? 11:30:47 also, we only have 3 then 11:30:48 it did - and i interptreted your 'count me in' as another vendor with $ 11:31:05 that aside, why not Magnus? 11:31:25 we're asking him to do work - it's only polite that he be OK doing that work 11:31:26 or run with 3 11:31:38 noone has to do any work. 11:31:47 yet 11:31:52 you're a librarian, you think reading isn't work ;) 11:32:10 well, i'm not ready to be voted in anywhere 11:32:17 ok, abort 11:32:18 #vote no 11:32:21 #endvote 11:32:21 Voted on "Nominate rangi BobB magnuse paul_p_ to sign the MOU on our behalf and call for nominations to the fundraising committee ASAP?" Results are 11:32:21 Yes (9): Joubu, ColinC, davidnind, joann, matts, paul_p_, BobB, mveron, thd 11:32:21 No (1): slef 11:32:33 the work will be in getting the Koha community to help develop and support the grants committee bylaws 11:32:41 slef: It depends on whether you are reading uphill or downhill :) 11:32:57 ok... shall I redo with "gmcharlt and/or nengard"? 11:33:10 works for me 11:33:11 * slef apologises 11:33:20 I guess we were not ready. I suggest the "open for nominations and vote in a week"-approach. 11:33:24 dont we have 9 votes for magnus, bobmpaul and chris? 11:33:29 akafred: +1 11:33:38 akafred: +1 11:33:39 sorry but that does not make sense now 11:33:49 * gmcharlt perks up 11:34:00 redo w me and nengard what...? 11:34:03 joann: yes but if magnuse is not willing it's not fair 11:34:16 i agree but he has not said =he is unwilling 11:34:19 gotta leave the meeting 11:34:20 if we down the number of sign-up ppl to 3, that would fit, isn't it ? ;-) 11:34:22 yo! gmcharlt! To read and if willing sign the HLT MOU 11:34:23 we are obviously not prepared to do this now 11:34:29 of course it would 11:34:46 so why was it 4? 11:34:47 slef: gotcha - thanks; I will in fact be reading in closely today 11:34:59 we picked a number 11:35:38 so let's pick 3 :D :D 11:36:11 I share akafred drojf misgivings about the lack of preparation but I recognise that the majority here are willing to do this now 11:36:20 The question is - will a hurried, unannounced vote for unprepared signatories today make everyone feel they "represent and are supported by the community". 11:36:22 I think 4 is fine, not too many, not too small 11:36:31 so I feel I must offer the meeting the choice 11:36:35 i'm not voting on anyone now. sorry. that does not feel right 11:36:49 but with or without gmcharlt? 11:37:06 we have 3 companies ready to fund, a NPO ready to host us, the MOU are very light, I feel it's just a "checking for checking" time delay. (sorry to be rude) 11:37:11 do you want your name on it gmcharlt perks? 11:37:18 perks??? 11:37:21 * slef looks at autocomplete 11:37:31 Its past midnight here so I am going to head of to bed. THT will do whatever the community wants. I am completely calm abou whetherthis gets through tonight or not. No problems. 11:37:38 #idea what about a vote for four signatories now, with a direction that they not sign the MOU for one week, during which time people may raise objections, and if three people request, call another meeting? 11:37:39 heh 11:38:05 BobB sounds fair enough. 11:38:06 drojf: I perfectly agree with your sentiment generally. However, I think we could vote them out just as easily at the next meeting if we think we acted too hastily. 11:38:22 but with respect to all who have already clearly worked hard on it... community approval a DAY after an announcement is meaningless 11:38:45 I am (a) willing to spend time closely reading it today and (b) willing to sign in within a week unless I have substantive objections 11:38:52 BobB: see my earlier reply to mveron. That feels to me like railroading and a compromise that serves no-one well. We may as well authorise the MOU now and let people block appointment of the fundraising committee. 11:38:56 Signatories have no role other than to 'iuse their best efforts to ensure the community does stuff" 11:38:57 and I do not want to delay it unecessary 11:39:05 we are not electing anyone to office here 11:39:17 gmcharlt++ 11:40:22 I'm going to call a second test vote unless anyone wants to phrase a vote for me...? 11:40:23 but I really do think it can take a week -- this is a big step, since, as it's being presented, it's more than just X Koha support providers banding together on a one-time project 11:40:35 ! 11:40:39 And then I'm going to move on rather than drag the meeting beyond 2 hours. 11:40:41 * slef waits for akafred 11:40:52 slef: an idea: shall we call for an IRC meeting next week dedicated to the MOU? 11:41:23 Lets give this authority by first voting "A. decide signatories now B. open nominations now and vote in a week." 11:41:32 BobB: Oh, if we are only electing signatories, why not appoint several notable people by invitation from HLT rather than merely three additional people now? 11:41:41 gmcharlt: would BobB be OK with that? IMO any signatory could hold IRC consultations before they sign if they want. 11:41:53 If A is chosen we can go ahead now. 11:42:18 akafred are you calling for a vote on Fundraising committee members in a week? That is rushing things imo 11:42:39 No, signatories 11:42:59 To make sure everyone feels they "represent and are supported by the commnity" 11:43:46 akafred's proposal sounds good to me 11:43:47 3 of them have been RM (at least once)... 11:43:49 #startvote Do we A: approve rangi BobB gmcharlt paul_p_ to sign the MOU as soon as they wish or B: open MOU nominations and vote at an IRC meeting next week? A, B 11:43:49 Begin voting on: Do we A: approve rangi BobB gmcharlt paul_p_ to sign the MOU as soon as they wish or B: open MOU nominations and vote at an IRC meeting next week? Valid vote options are A, B. 11:43:49 Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. 11:43:54 i would suggest two separate votes 1) Support MOU and purpose (subject to any minor edits deemed necessary) 2) Nominations for signatories with voting in a week - Bob, Galen, Chris, Paul (subject to agreement to represent and open for further nominations) 11:44:05 davidnind: sorry 11:44:10 #vote B 11:44:17 #vote B 11:44:18 #vote A 11:44:19 #vote B 11:44:24 I can't type very fast, sorry here.. 11:44:36 #vote A 11:44:39 #vote A 11:44:41 #vote B 11:44:43 #vote A 11:44:44 #vote A 11:45:05 * BobB again votes in favour of the MOU being signed, not for himself as a signatory 11:45:14 davidnind: that's why I suggest screaming ! to make me wait. Sorry if you did and I missed it. 11:45:14 #vote A 11:45:20 * akafred just wants to clarify that his vote is about the process, not the people. 11:45:25 #info BobB again votes in favour of the MOU being signed, not for himself as a signatory 11:45:28 BobB: so noted 11:45:37 thx :) 11:45:38 #vote A 11:45:44 Is the apparent haste in the moment for something which has been discussed with long interruptions and not much attention between motivated by the fact that there are three parties willing to contribute funds who may loose interest if delayed? 11:46:03 for my part - I will make an informed decision and am willing to be on a list of signatories, but feel pretty strongly that the list should not be exclusive 11:46:16 #showvote 11:46:16 A (7): Joubu, ColinC, davidnind, paul_p_, eythian_, BobB, chris_n 11:46:16 B (4): magnuse, drojf, akafred, mveron 11:46:18 i.e., if somebody else chooses to sign, they should be able to do so 11:46:44 #vote B 11:46:48 Anyone want to persuade people to change sides? Anyone ovvering to change sides? 11:46:53 offering 11:46:59 * slef switches autocomplete back on 11:47:06 thd: er, I will choose assume that potential contributors are familiar enough with the ways of our community not to be put off by a week for folks to consider 11:47:42 #vote B 11:48:09 #showvote 11:48:09 A (6): Joubu, ColinC, davidnind, paul_p_, BobB, chris_n 11:48:09 B (6): magnuse, akafred, eythian_, mveron, thd, drojf 11:48:30 lol 11:48:37 gmcharlt, I have no problem with that, I do not much care who signs it, as long as they are willing to 'use their best endeavours' to make the community do what it is ageeing to do 11:48:40 I'm going to make a casting vote then... 11:48:56 #vote B 11:49:01 sorry BobB 11:49:14 so exactly what does that mean chairman 11:49:18 #endvote 11:49:18 Voted on "Do we A: approve rangi BobB gmcharlt paul_p_ to sign the MOU as soon as they wish or B: open MOU nominations and vote at an IRC meeting next week?" Results are 11:49:18 A (6): Joubu, ColinC, davidnind, paul_p_, BobB, chris_n 11:49:18 B (7): magnuse, slef, akafred, eythian_, mveron, thd, drojf 11:49:31 is the MOU not endorsed? 11:49:44 then who is going to step up to fix whatever must be fixed? 11:49:47 not this week, sorry - I think there's no objection to the MOU itself 11:49:52 and what must be fixed? 11:49:58 just to the rush to names 11:50:11 BobB: i think we all endorse the MOU. some of us just have difficulties with rushing through this now after sending out the MOU last night (my time zone) 11:50:12 well I'd like the naming consistent ;) 11:50:18 that is not at all clear from the motion that has been determined just now 11:50:25 could you publish the source code for the MOU so we can patch it, please? 11:50:40 lol 11:50:45 I'll open the nominations and chair next week's IRC meeting unless anyone else replaces me 11:50:46 BobB: My vote was not against endorsing the MOU but merely waiting a week to give people more opportunity to consider details before endorsing. 11:50:56 slef++ 11:51:26 I suspect we'll end up with the davidnind four anyway but it'll be a stronger agreement for it 11:51:40 let's move on! 11:51:43 It's not clear to me that patches would even be required -- I think it's purely a matter of respect for the time of contributors to Koha that if one proposes something to which one also desires general community assent... that a reasonable amount of time be allowed for them to read closely 11:51:56 #topic 8. Actions from General IRC meeting 11 February 2015 11:51:58 i don't have any objection to the davidnind four or the MOU. only to the rushed process today 11:52:08 * magnuse agrees with gmcharlt 11:52:13 * akafred too 11:52:16 ok, I'm off to bed, good night all 11:52:23 * magnuse agrees with drojf too 11:52:28 night BobB - same time next week? 11:52:29 if community assent was not, in fact, desired -- I don't think there's in fact any bar to whoever who wants to do it from setting up funding pools 11:52:45 anyone know about the Roadmap for Koha? 11:52:46 thanks for you work on this BobB 11:53:00 BobB ++ 11:53:02 BobB++ 11:53:07 ...and joann 11:53:08 joann++ 11:53:12 joann ++ 11:53:27 akafred did some work on the roadmap? 11:53:38 I have suggested a couple of things; 11:54:06 One is that we should "commit" to provide a REST api as per the REST RFC. 11:54:43 This looks to me a bit like a zombie agenda item that has been stumbling on since http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/General_IRC_meeting_17_December_2014 :( 11:55:34 or actually november 11:55:52 I only added it as it seemed to still be open, if it's available for contribution and no further discussion required, then that is okay 11:56:02 can we ask if the RMs support this approach? 11:56:17 duhhhh 11:56:18 rephrase 11:56:23 shall we ask if the RMs support this approach? 11:56:49 The other is that the work on Plack (which is rumored to have real implications for performance) should be brought forward. 11:56:53 otherwise it could become another place where contributors become alienated :( 11:57:18 * magnuse gotta wander off 11:57:25 I think the idea of the road map has already been agreed, with release manager holding final say inwaht goes int to a release 11:57:40 #idea ask if the RMs support this approach? 11:57:49 I'm going to close the meeting because I need to leave too 11:57:51 s/be in what goes into a release 11:57:54 Both REST and Plack had progress last week in Marseille. 11:58:09 unless anyone else wants to take the chair, finish this and set the next meeting date? 11:58:28 ! 11:58:38 * slef waits for thd 11:58:51 slef: You cannot stay for selecting the next meeting time? 11:59:14 not unless it's dead quick 11:59:21 next meeting is next week isn't it. 11:59:24 ? 11:59:25 aha 11:59:31 Next normal meeting 8 April 2015 10:00 UTC, MOU meeting next week 18 March 10:00 UTC 11:59:31 The mou vote. 11:59:32 I mean next general meeting 11:59:42 MOU meeting next week 18 March 10 UTC 11:59:45 please 11:59:55 +1 to 8 April 10UTC for next general meeting 12:00:04 +1 to 18 March 10 UTC for MOU meeting 12:00:19 usual pattern would be 8 April 4 UTC wouldn't it? 12:00:43 gmcharlt: should we not alternate to 21 UTC as recently? 12:00:49 19 UTC recently 12:00:55 19 UTC 12:00:59 sorry, I was just going by what davidnind said 12:01:01 I see teh 4 UTC seems to have dropped 12:01:04 I'm also fine with 19UTC 12:01:21 #topic 9. Set date/time of next general IRC meeting 12:01:23 fine with any time, not sure what recent pattern has been 12:01:24 4 UTC is guaranteed minimal attendance. 12:01:27 seeing as we've already gone with that 12:01:40 8 April is 2 days after Easter Monday 12:01:45 still OK with everyone? 12:01:53 yes 12:01:54 +1 for 19utc on 8 april 12:02:03 +1 8 April 19 UTC 12:02:20 +1 for 19utc on 8 april 12:02:32 -1 #19 UTC is too late for me 12:02:48 davidnind: you copied that from me. it's my intellectual property ^^ 12:02:59 well we each take it in the neck sometimes Joubu ! 12:03:02 #agreed 8 April 19UTC for next general meeting, 18 March 10:00 UTC for MOU agreement meeting 12:03:16 #info Thank you all for lasting this long! See you next week! 12:03:19 #endmeeting