09September20

Sunday, September 20th, 2009, 7:00pm (1900) PDT

Summary

  1. Announcements
    1. Our approval meeting got postponed, but hasn't been rescheduled yet.
    2. 10.04 was unofficially announced as "Lucid Lynx" and will be LTS.
    3. Art of Community is available for free download.

    4. Karmic Alpha 5 released; Alpha 6 coming out on Thursday.
  2. Global Jam on Saturday, October 3rd at 2:00pm
    1. North California: UC Berkeley
    2. South California: Chapman University
    3. Unlikely to have full audio-video joint presentations, may fall back on IRC discussions or other lower-tech ideas.
    4. Topic ideas: Testing, Packaging, SpreadUbuntu, Inkscape, USTeams Wiki Doc Day

      1. Perhaps do general wiki editing tutorial instead of USTeams-specific wiki stuff
      2. Grant will email the list about the marketing idea and how it fits into the Global Jam theme.
  3. Discussion of LoCo structure and processes

    1. Who is a member of the LoCo team? (everyone who's done stuff related to us)

    2. How does a LoCo get selected as the LoCo for a state? (general first-come basis, unless there are problems)

    3. The team contact is not necessarily the team leader.
    4. Considering multiple people in leadership positions (IRC ops, ML admins, etc.) to prevent the "hit by a bus" factor
    5. Discussion of voting for leadership positions and leader speaking officially vs. expressing opinion
    6. erichammond proposed to summarize the current team structure and policies in a wiki page so that it is clear.
  4. Meetup this Saturday in San Francisco

Original Agenda

  1. Karmic Global Jam

    1. Time, Day, Location. North and South: Day definitely needs to be the same, time should be similar. SoCal location is already decided.

    2. Topics - We need to come to consensus on two (with a third as a backup?), the sooner the better, but definitely by the 27th.
    3. Technical Stuff - Can we do a dry run sometime within the next week?
  2. Karmic Release

  3. California team organization, management structure, processes. What are they? What should they be?
    • The Ubuntu community documentation doesn't give a lot of guidance for team organization, but leaves this up to the local teams.

      Since Ubuntu California is applying for official LoCo membership, I would like to understand what folks consider to be the structure of the team.

      • Who is "Ubuntu California"? I.e., who is applying for LoCo membership?

      • Are there any team positions which hold responsibility?
      • Are there any team positions which hold authority?
      • Who holds these positions currently, if anybody?
      • How and when are these positions filled or replaced?
      • Is there any process for resolving disagreements within the team?
      • Who can speak on behalf of the team or in the team's name? (to user groups, conferences, Ubuntu central, etc.)

Log

19:06:43 < Flannel> Ok, so, welcome everyone to the Sept 20th meeting.  Hope everyone enjoyed their exactly 12 hours of daylight today.
19:07:07 < Flannel> We've got a fair bit of stuff on our agenda for tonight, Global Jam is coming up in two weeks, so this is our last meeting before then.
19:07:33 < Flannel> Our agenda currently consists of : Global Jam, Org/Structure/Etc, and lastly Karmic.
19:07:44 < Flannel> But first, some announcements,
19:08:24 < Flannel> Our Approval meeting got postponed, we're still not sure until when, but keep an ear to the ML and the microblogs and you'll stay updated
19:08:51 < Flannel> Also, unofficially (as of today): 10.04 will be LTS, and is codenamed Lucid Lynx
19:09:20 < Grantbow> \o/
19:09:50 < Flannel> I think that's it on the announcement front... anyone have anything else?
19:09:55 < rww> ( "unofficially" because the email didn't go out yet; Mark said it at a Linux event )
19:10:00 < Grantbow> I have a brief announcement.  The Art of Community is available for free download now.  http://www.jonobacon.org/2009/09/18/the-art-of-community-available-for-free-download/
19:10:18 < jdeslip> Grantbow: grabbed it
19:10:20 < Flannel> Oh, and alpha 5 was released, right?
19:10:27 < Grantbow> alpha 6, yeah
19:10:31 < jdeslip> Planning on buying the book anyway to support the effort
19:10:38 < nhaines> Flannel: Alpha 6 on Thursday
19:10:46 < Flannel> Alright, alpha 6.
19:10:52 < jdeslip> XSplash looks nice :)
19:11:01 < rww> it just got catalogued at work, so I should have it soon :)
19:11:11 < Flannel> So, with that, does anyone have anything else to add to the agenda?  If you remember something later, feel free to speak up during the meeting.
19:11:38 < Flannel> Alright, Global Jam it is!
19:12:38 < Flannel> Global Jam is the weekend of Oct 2-4, and we'll be participating as a group on one of those days.  We've got a few things to plan before then.  Not necessarily tonight, but very soon.
19:13:12 < Flannel> We've already pinned down a location for the SoCal one,
19:13:23 < Grantbow> Northern California site is UC Berkeley at 2:00 on Saturday, October 3rd.
19:13:39 < Grantbow> many thanks to jdeslip for acting as host!
19:14:02 < Flannel> Is that time in stone based on room availability? can we massage it either way?
19:14:21 < kevin|demarest> I've never been to Chapman University.  Will the Global Jam be easy to find on campus?
19:14:24 < Grantbow> What did you have in mind?
19:14:47 < nhaines> kevin|demarest: yes, it's not hard.
19:15:10 < Flannel> Grantbow: Well, since we're doing it jointly, it would be nice to know what flexibility we have on times
19:15:21 < Flannel> if none, that's fine, we just need to know
19:15:34 < Grantbow> There is some flexibility, what did you have in mind?
19:15:48 < kevin|demarest> nhaines: I've never been to a Global Jam.  Is there a website I should be reading?
19:16:19 < Grantbow> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGlobalJam
19:16:24 < Flannel> Grantbow: I don't have anything in mind right now, we just need to know what we have to work with, since as far as I know, event time hasn't been discussed at all
19:16:50 < nhaines> kevin|demarest: grant was faster on the draw than me, but that's the one to work on.  It's also okay to come along just to be there.  There's almost certain to be something interesting going on.
19:17:53 < kevin|demarest> Is anyone staying in the Chapman area for the two days?
19:18:09 < kevin|demarest> 3 days
19:18:19 < Yasumoto_> kevin|demarest: we'll have signs put up, and a google map which shows parking and such
19:18:21 < Flannel> kevin|demarest: We're just having an event on one day (Saturday), there's nothing going on (except on the internet) for the others
19:18:49 < kevin|demarest> Yasumoto_, Flannel: thanks
19:19:09 < Grantbow> that's alot of something on the Internet!
19:19:40 < nhaines> kevin|demarest: Saturday will give you a good foundation to keep going online on Sunday.  :)
19:20:00 < jbermudes1> Grantbow: I think the internet tends to be full of a lot of somethings
19:20:16 < Flannel> So, next we need to discuss topics for the jam.  I'm thinking two topics, with a third choice as a spare incase we can't find presenters for the two.
19:20:42 < Grantbow> jbermudes1: yes, and in this case very relevant stuff with helpful people.  Folks can contribute from home as well if they are interested.
19:20:51 < kevin|demarest> nhaines: good, I can use some stability :)
19:21:34 < Flannel> As some background, this is a chance for people (us) to learn about how to do stuff with regard to bettering Ubuntu in some way.  Learning how to triage bugs is something many people are interested in doing, but many don't ever learn because, frankly, it can be intimidating sometimes.
19:21:59 < Flannel> This gives us a chance for thoseof us who know how to teach those of us who don't, on whatever topics we decide.
19:22:07 < rww> Basic packaging skills would be another one of those daunting-but-popular topics
19:22:44 < Grantbow> rww: much higher learning curve though
19:22:58 < Flannel> So, first we're going to find a list of topics, then we'll look for presenters for those topics (which is why we need a backup!)
19:23:33 < Grantbow> Flannel: what time will the event be at Chapman?
19:23:36 < Flannel> From the wiki, we've got: Testing, SpreadUbuntu, Inkscape, USTeams Wiki Doc Day
19:23:47 < Flannel> Grantbow: Whatever time it is in the north, since we're doing a joint event
19:23:48 < kevin|demarest> is their an official recipe to packaging online?
19:24:01 < Flannel> Grantbow: or at least hoping to
19:24:04 < kevin|demarest> *there >:(
19:24:04 < Grantbow> Flannel: what do you mean by joint?
19:24:05 < rww> kevin|demarest: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide
19:24:14 < kevin|demarest> rww: thank you
19:24:35 < Flannel> Grantbow: We'll have two rooms of people, connected via audio and video, so that we'll all be able to learn from each others questions and stuff.
19:24:40 < rww> kevin|demarest: there are links to videos by Daniel Holbach in there. I'd recommend starting with them.
19:25:08 < nhaines> kevin|demarest: stick around after the meeting, we can answer all of your questions and find links then.  :)
19:25:09 < Flannel> Grantbow: The presenters will present for everyone (all over CA) to view, ideally with someone in the other location to help out if needed for detailed questions, etc.
19:25:20 < jdeslip> I dont
19:25:28 < jdeslip> think video is available in North
19:25:48 < kevin|demarest> :)
19:26:03 < Flannel> The classroom won't have a projector + webcam or anything?
19:26:34 < jdeslip> Well, to be honest, I have space available - but don't have time to invest planning/setting-up etc
19:26:38 < Flannel> DWonderly also mentioned he might have video.. something or other if needed
19:27:17 < jdeslip> So, no -  don't have projector or cam
19:28:27 < jdeslip> I'm counting on others to take lead in this event - it seems Grant is the only one stepping up to plan an event North.  I have some space but no time.
19:28:31 < Grantbow> IRC only it seems unless someone volunteers to provide an audio stream.
19:29:42 < Flannel> Alright, well, we have two choices here.  We can decide against the joint event entirely, or we can still assume we'll find a method and plan as if it might still happen.
19:29:59 < Grantbow> We should not make assumptions.
19:30:03 < Flannel> Obviously for scheduling, there's no consequences for the latter.
19:30:29 < nhaines> Grantbow: is that a vote for two separate events?
19:30:33 < Flannel> However, we do need to provide some method of presenting, for both locations
19:31:19 < nhaines> Flannel: I have an HD camcorder and can record presentations in SoCal.
19:31:48 < Grantbow> nhaines: these are not the only options - an IRC presentation is also possible, low tech and easy to setup.
19:32:15 < Flannel> We could use IRC as a fallback, with visual aids as well.
19:32:26 < Grantbow> this is the way Open Weeks and Developer weeks work and they do pretty well.
19:32:29 < nhaines> Grantbow: that would be option two, where we assume we'll still fine a method.
19:32:29 < Flannel> Especially if we can get a satellite presenter to at least help out at the other event
19:32:50 < Grantbow> nhaines: I would call it option 3
19:32:57 < Flannel> However, the point of global jam is to bring people together
19:33:09 < Grantbow> Flannel: don't assume resources
19:33:16 < Flannel> Grantbow: What?
19:33:19 < nhaines> Flannel: in my professional experience, dual satellite presentations are almost prohibitively difficult unless they are not actually synchronized.
19:33:52 < Flannel> nhaines: Satellite people would be mostly for front line questions: "I don't know what I'm looking at" "Ah, you're on the wrong dialog"
19:33:53 < nhaines> So, we could have two presentations on the same topic at the same time, that wouldn't be a problem.  But to have two people do an identical one at both places isn't too easy.  :)
19:34:12 < nhaines> Flannel: that might be more feasible, especially with a good remote desktop solution.
19:34:33 < Flannel> nhaines: And it'll easily lend itself to video/audio if we can scrounge it up
19:35:08 < kevin|demarest> is it a fact that there isn't going to be a project in the classroom at Chapman?
19:35:14 < kevin|demarest> *projector
19:35:24 < rww> *Berkeley
19:35:26 < Flannel> So, does anyone have an objection to still staying tied together from the north and south?  With the hope of full video, but with various fallbacks in case of problems?
19:35:56 < Flannel> "tied" means joint/same topics, and schedules
19:36:15 < nhaines> Flannel: I'm all for it if we can find multiple presenters or an audio solution.
19:36:16 < Flannel> We can always decide to change midway through the event if it's not going well too.  We aren't robots
19:36:41 < Flannel> Alright, so, lets continue on that course, and we can reevaluate once we know more about our topics and presenters and resources
19:37:08 < Flannel> Is that a correct summary-ish thing of how everyone feels?
19:37:43 < nhaines> Do we have a timeframe where we do a go/no-go decision?
19:38:06 < Flannel> nhaines: I think next weekend really is our drop dead time, give presenters a week or so to prep
19:38:48 < nhaines> Sounds good to me.
19:38:54 < kevin|demarest> I don't see a problem with synchronicity, I just don't know how to implement a video conference on the cheap
19:39:43 < nhaines> kevin|demarest: There are tricks to it but we'll manage.
19:39:52 < kevin|demarest> cool :)
19:40:31 < rww> get two macs, load up iChat, and do screen sharing :O
19:40:34  * rww ducks
19:40:36 < Flannel> Alright, so.  Back to topics, our list so far is: Testing, Packaging, SpreadUbuntu, Inkscape, and the USTeams Wiki Doc Day
19:40:46 < Grantbow> lol
19:40:56 < Grantbow> 20 minutes left
19:40:57 < Yasumoto_> kernel debugging! :)
19:41:20 < erichammond> Am I correct in assuming that we will not get to my agenda item before 8pm?
19:41:22 < Flannel> WikiDocDay is a proposal for teams who aren't having Jams to participate as individuals, basically.
19:41:42 < Flannel> erichammond: We'll be able to get started on it, I think
19:42:17 < Flannel> So I'd like to propose a removal of WDD, and instead add just general "How To" edit the wiki
19:42:23 < Grantbow> erichammond: I hope we do.
19:42:53 < nhaines> erichammond: we're not technically time-constrained to one hour.
19:43:04 < Flannel> We generally run 90 minutes
19:43:18 < Flannel> Grantbow: I believe you added the SU thing, I'm not sure how that would fit into the global jam theme, would you like to say a line or two about how it does?
19:43:35 < Grantbow> if you like
19:43:44 < Grantbow> There was discussion of this I'll fetch from other places
19:43:54 < Grantbow> after the meeting and email the list
19:44:00 < Flannel> Grantbow: Alright, thanks
19:44:04 < Grantbow> The idea is that marketing is another contribution.
19:44:32 < Grantbow> back to you
19:44:34 < Flannel> Grantbow: We'll be able to discuss it fully on the list, along with topics in general, that'll work best actually.
19:44:55 < Flannel> alright, I think that's it for Global Jam,
19:45:18 < Flannel> Stay tuned to the mailing list, where we'll be discussing topics, since it could take an hour here alone easily.
19:45:21 < kevin|demarest> I can do "brute force marketing".
19:45:22  * kevin|demarest repeats "switch to ubuntu 100 times"
19:45:46  * kevin|demarest buries himself in sand
19:45:48 < rww> "Ubuntu, apply directly to the hard drive. Ubuntu, apply directly to the harddrive. Ubuntu, apply directly to the hard drive."
19:45:49 < Flannel> So, with that said, erichammond, we've moved onto your item.  Would you like me to introduce each topic on the agenda? or would you like to?
19:45:58 < Flannel> bad rww, bad.
19:47:04 < erichammond> I'm not sure what you mean by "topic".  The questions I posed were to give a general idea of what I'm wondering about.
19:47:20 < Flannel> erichammond: Alright, I'll just wade into it then?
19:47:32 < erichammond> Thanks.
19:48:19 < Flannel> Ok, so, the topic currently at hand is the structure and processes of our LoCo.
19:48:24 < pleia2> regarding this topic, I can probably offer some insight into how some of the other large states handle structures and things
19:48:33 < pleia2> if there is interest :)
19:48:42 < nhaines> Thanks, pleia2.  :)
19:48:51 < Flannel> First, I think, is an easy question: Who is "Ubuntu California", when we're applying to become an Official LoCo, who exactly is "we"
19:48:58 < Flannel> Or, the easiest, anyway
19:49:26 < Flannel> As an organization, we're looking to be recognized for our efforts
19:49:29 < kevin|demarest> California is a big state
19:49:33 < Flannel> spreading, promoting, etc, Ubuntu throughout California.
19:49:34 < Yasumoto_> pleia2: sweet, thanks
19:50:30 < Flannel> This includes everyone whos ever worked an event, or even helped organize it (including merely chatting in this channel)
19:50:50 < kevin|demarest> personally, I see the best opportunity to spreading Ubuntu in California is through the government and non-profit organizations
19:50:58 < kevin|demarest> *spread
19:51:05 < Flannel> kevin|demarest: Strategy is for another time ;)
19:51:12 < kevin|demarest> affirmative
19:51:26 < Flannel> erichammond: Does that address that facet of the application process?
19:51:39 < GidgetKitchen> pleia2: pennsylvania has  multiple approaches am I right
19:51:49 < pleia2> GidgetKitchen: yep
19:53:11 < erichammond> Flannel: For me, that raises more questions than it answers.  I don't understand how the people who wrote that application can speak for everybody who has spoken on this channel.  However, perhaps answers to other questions will help clear that up.
19:53:41 < Flannel> erichammond: We've been discussing the application in our meetings and the ML for a while, but yes, perhaps the others would clear it up.
19:53:48 < jdeslip> Out of curiosity, what makes this group "THE LoCo" for California?  I.e. how did this group become the LoCo - can any group become a LoCo if they fit the bill?
19:53:50 < Flannel> erichammond: The application itself is basically just a summary of our events though
19:54:04 < jdeslip> (not that I am planning a fork or anything - just curious)
19:54:22 < Flannel> jdeslip: Can I answer that after the meeting?  Or at least later?  I know some people are on time constraints
19:54:27 < erichammond> jdeslip: Good question.
19:54:50 < Flannel> Alright, we'll go ahead and do that one now then,
19:54:53 < jdeslip> You can answer whenever.  Just curious.
19:54:59 < pleia2> jdeslip: loco founding is pretty first come, first serve - so whoever in the state gets things together and announces to the community is the one who is the contact
19:55:30 < pleia2> things grow from there, if there is a problem with a team contact it can be taken to the loco council for disucssion
19:56:05 < Grantbow> my reading of the relevant documents leads me to believe that contact is not necessarily leader either - they are not tied together.
19:56:12 < erichammond> pleia2: Thanks.
19:56:13 < Flannel> Grantbow: That's correct.
19:56:19 < jdeslip> First come first serve isn't much of a mandate for control
19:56:33 < pleia2> jdeslip: community leaders are bound by the Code of Conduct
19:56:47 < Grantbow> and leadership CoC too
19:56:49 < pleia2> which includes a lot of requirements for being a contact
19:56:51  * pleia2 nods
19:57:01 < Yasumoto_> jdeslip: from what I've seen with most of the state LoCoc's it's worked pretty well
19:57:18 < jdeslip> Could say - another group pop up that represents CA or part of CA?
19:57:19 < Grantbow> http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct
19:57:22 < Grantbow> http://www.ubuntu.com/community/leadership-conduct
19:57:39 < erichammond> jdeslip: As long as there is a process for appealing an initial contact, it makes sense to me.
19:57:40 < jdeslip> (again not planning one - just curious where the leadership mandate comes from)
19:57:41 < Flannel> jdeslip: The theory is that new people should collaborate instead of compete
19:57:45 < pleia2> jdeslip: if another group popped up, they'd have to edit the loco list and it would be a problem
19:57:56 < GidgetKitchen> california has always been a little splintered
19:58:07 < GidgetKitchen> that is what us ---- us
19:58:25 < Flannel> GidgetKitchen: We've always had people from all over the state actually
19:58:42 < GidgetKitchen> not in the loco sense
19:58:44 < pleia2> GidgetKitchen: a lot of state teams are like that (especially the larger ones), but as a whole they operate together and collaborate
19:58:48 < nhaines> Critical mass for various areas has waxed and waned, though.
19:58:48 < GidgetKitchen> just in general
19:58:56 < pleia2> like pennsylvania has major teams both in philadelphia and pittsburg
19:58:58 < Grantbow> There are docs that describe how to start and run a LoCo. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoTeamHowto
19:58:59 < jdeslip> pleia2:  is it only for states - could there be a BayArea Ubuntu - or Manhatten Ubunut?
19:59:01 < Grantbow> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoTeamLeader
19:59:02 < GidgetKitchen> I agree
19:59:11 < pleia2> jdeslip: it's only for states
19:59:21 < Grantbow> though structure is left up to the loco's themselves
19:59:25 < pleia2> jdeslip: the US is an exception - normally it's COUNTRIES, so we're lucky that canonical lets us do it state-wise :)
19:59:40 < pleia2> so all of brazil is one huuuuge loco team
19:59:42 < GidgetKitchen> norcal & socal have more in common with each other than ANYWHERE ELSE!
19:59:43 < pleia2> for instance
19:59:43 < nhaines> jdeslip: some city teams are grandfathered in, but now it's just countries, with the US also having state-based teams.
19:59:45 < jdeslip> lol
19:59:51 < kevin|demarest> Just to clarify, there is a distinction between the official loco group and other groups promoting ubuntu?
20:00:25 < nhaines> kevin|demarest: LoCos are designed to fit in with the Ubuntu community.
20:00:30 < GidgetKitchen> kevin: anyone can promote
20:00:43 < nhaines> kevin|demarest: whereas other groups promote on their own volition.  There is no rivalry inherent there.
20:00:58 < rww> That reminds me, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/USTeams/TeamList still thinks there's a San Diego LoCo.
20:01:09 < GidgetKitchen> it's all about logistics
20:01:16 < kevin|demarest> I'm not speaking about "rivalry", which sounds silly, I'm just talking about organization
20:01:19 < rww> the map, that is, not the page.
20:01:20 < pleia2> rww: city teams can no longer get approved though
20:01:31 < pleia2> so they're mostly dissolving
20:01:32 < Grantbow> GidgetKitchen: actually I think it's more about identity
20:01:41 < Flannel> pleia2: He meant the star, which has been around since forever (even though the team isn't)
20:01:42 < rww> pleia2: the SD one did, that'
20:01:45 < rww> s my point ;)
20:01:52 < rww> dissolve, that is
20:01:56 < pleia2> Flannel: ah, should be updated then?
20:02:01  * rww hates his keyboard and its "press enter randomly" feature
20:02:18 < Flannel> pleia2: Yeah, it dissolved in 2007
20:02:22 < nhaines> Does that serve to answer some of the background about LoCo teams?
20:02:24 < Grantbow> pleia2: I pinged you in this channel about that yesterday or the day before, yes, it needs to be removed.
20:02:28 < kevin|demarest> city groups are dissolving?  it would be nice if there were "unofficial city groups" to collaborate with
20:02:33 < pleia2> Flannel: ok, good to know, I'll update it this week
20:02:47 < GidgetKitchen> grantbowl: socal is more beautiful - norcal is more hippy?
20:02:57 < pleia2> kevin|demarest: a lot of loco teams have regions
20:02:58 < Grantbow> kevin|demarest: real life meetings are specifically encouraged within LoCos
20:03:21 < Yasumoto_> GidgetKitchen: NorCal has better breweries :)
20:03:29 < pleia2> tennessee is split in half, pennsylvania has 3 major regions that hold regular events (and a couple other places that hold events sometimes)
20:03:29 < kevin|demarest> Grantbow: what about roadtrips? :D
20:03:40  * kevin|demarest grabs his tent
20:03:40 < Grantbow> Yasumoto_: epic :-)
20:03:42 < pleia2> but we all work together in the same channel, coordinating release parties with each other, etc
20:03:43 < GidgetKitchen> sorry portland has better breweries!!!
20:03:56 < rww> GidgetKitchen +1
20:04:07 < erichammond> So, so far it's been suggested: (1) We have one official position which is the team contact (2) The team contact is not necessarily related to leadership, (3) Everybody who has chatted on this channel or done something for an event is a member of the California team.
20:04:25 < Flannel> erichammond: So far that's what we've discussed, yes.
20:04:36 < nhaines> We also have a Team Leader position.
20:04:41 < Flannel> And, since we've got a natural segue into governance, we might as well cover that
20:04:56 < jdeslip> Why exactly is the team contact a particular person?  First come, first serve seems like a pathetic reason.
20:05:05 < GidgetKitchen> IRC is a requirement to be a loco member?
20:05:08 < nhaines> In the Ubuntu California LoCo, the model is of the benevolent-dictator-for-life.
20:05:23 < kevin|demarest> jdeslip: efficiency would be my guess
20:05:25 < pleia2> jdeslip: ubuntu needs a single person as a point of contact for official discussions, sending/requesting cds, conference packs, etc
20:05:31 < Grantbow> GidgetKitchen: for us effectively it has been
20:05:35 < rww> heh. I was always under the impression that whoever joined the LP group is a member, but I guess this never came up before, so *shrug*
20:05:38 < Flannel> GidgetKitchen: No, participation in any way, he didn't mention a number of things, ML activity, etc
20:05:44 < pleia2> so even if there is a whole ruling board, there is still one person who is a contact
20:05:46 < jdeslip> What happens if the person quits or leaves randomly for weeks (i.e. CENT OS fiasco)
20:05:48 < Flannel> GidgetKitchen: He was summarizing, details get lost
20:05:57 < pleia2> jdeslip: then you take it to the loco council
20:06:04 < pleia2> (or USTeams - we can often resolve things)
20:06:08 < GidgetKitchen> flannel: thanx
20:06:11 < Grantbow> rww: good point
20:06:45 < rww> although for situations like jdeslip mentioned, it's probably useful to have more than one IRC channel op / list admin / launchpad admin / whatever I'm missing. I was planning on bringing that up after approval.
20:06:57 < kevin|demarest> I thought that applying on the web was all a person needed to do to be considered "in"...
20:06:57 < pleia2> rww: absolutely
20:06:57 < rww> partially because the IRC thing is still being sorted out with freenode
20:07:00 < Flannel> rww: That's the hit-by-a-bus thing, yes.
20:07:10 < rww> yeah
20:07:29 < pleia2> in us-pa we require anyone who is a volunteer admin on things to have signed the CoC
20:07:40 < Grantbow> having backups for resources just makes good sense regardless of structure, especially in volunteer groups
20:07:51 < erichammond> Could we elaborate on the Team Leader position?  What are the responsibilities, authority,if any?
20:07:53 < Flannel> So, moving on to how we're run?
20:07:59 < Flannel> Yes, looks like we are
20:08:29 < Flannel> So far, we've been operating on consensus, which works well for groups this size.
20:08:47 < Flannel> and then the leader steps in when consensus cannot be reached, to prevent blocks
20:08:56 < Flannel> s/when/if/
20:09:17 < jdeslip> I am more interested in the actual process of electing that leader
20:09:31 < Flannel> This is how many FOSS groups are operated
20:09:35 < nhaines> jdeslip: in the current model, the leader is not elected.
20:10:17 < jdeslip> wouldn't it make sense to have some sort of election every year to make sure leadership reflects the views of the group.
20:10:47 < GidgetKitchen> the leader hasn't crossed the line --- has he - i say no
20:10:52 < Flannel> We'd spend a good portion of our time dealing with elections, when we could be spending that time better elsewhere
20:11:09 < GidgetKitchen> our leader is fine -- it is the structure that needs to be fixed
20:11:10 < nhaines> Over the last two years, the group hasn't been large enough to support an election process.
20:11:12 < erichammond> GidgetKitchen: I would very much prefer we not get into that type of discussion
20:11:14 < jercos> Vote Skynet 2012.
20:11:21 < erichammond> but just focus on what the current structure is.
20:11:29 < kevin|demarest> why is an election necessary?  aren't we free to speak our mind?
20:11:35 < jdeslip> (probably leadership wouldn't change often - but I'd personally be more happy to know that the leadership is always representing the views of the group)
20:11:43 < Grantbow> jercos: +1
20:12:02 < Flannel> Especially with a small group like this, when everyone can communicate easily with each other, there shouldn't be too many problems without one
20:12:03 < pleia2> kevin|demarest: yeah, that's how most teams work, voices of the team are just as important as any others (including the leader), team leaders just step in for major conflicts
20:12:12 < GidgetKitchen> gidgetkitchen just checked-- it is the US - speak freely
20:12:19 < nhaines> jdeslip: in the case of a governance crisis, the USTeam or LoCo Council would help smooth things over.
20:12:30 < jdeslip> I.e. we are remaining flexible and not stuck with anything just because it was there first.
20:12:35 < pleia2> mostly team leaders are just encouraging, making sure resources are updated, encouraging regions to have events, passing along info from the loco list
20:12:44 < pleia2> rather than being "rulers" of the group
20:12:45 < nhaines> But the -- nevermind, pleia2 siad it perfectly.  :)
20:12:47 < Flannel> If there's consensus in the group except for the leader, and the leader blocks it, then that'd be against the rules of leadership
20:12:49 < pleia2> :)
20:13:05 < nhaines> "There go my people, and I must follow, for I am their leader."
20:13:18 < GidgetKitchen> nhaines +1
20:13:34 < rww> So what happens when there's no consensus on an issue that needs to be decided?
20:13:50 < Grantbow> which has happened
20:14:03 < nhaines> rww: then the Team Leader makes a decision.
20:14:03 < jdeslip> Look, I am not saying that leadership now needs to change.  But, to create a better group for many years ahead - it seems like creating a dynamic "democratic" organization is best
20:14:21 < erichammond> rww: As I understand how it has been explained, the Team Leader has ultimate authority.
20:14:25 < Flannel> rww: If no decision would harm the group
20:15:04 < erichammond> Question: If the team contact can be appealed to the higher levels, is the same process followed for Team Leader?
20:15:06 < rww> Flannel: well, if you take the various arguments on the ML about the wiki, "no decision" effectively means whatever's on there now, which is a decision... if that makes sense.
20:15:12 < jdeslip> Even high school organizations have a generally democratic structure - it is a good way to ensure groups future.
20:15:17 < Flannel> rww: If leaving it open isn't a problem (perhaps not enough information at the time, or whatever) then there's no reason for a decision to be made
20:16:11 < Flannel> jdeslip: Our current structure is generally democratic.  The leader is only "leading" when the team can't come to consensus
20:16:28 < jdeslip> It is a constitutional monarchy ;)
20:16:33 < kevin|demarest> jdeslip: democracy isn't necessarily the most efficient form of organization
20:16:46 < erichammond> Flannel: That isn't my perception of the group at this point.
20:16:50 < jdeslip> I am worried not about now but about laying foundations for a long healthy future
20:16:50 < Grantbow> Flannel: actually it's closer to de facto, autocratic band societies.
20:17:39 < nhaines> jdeslip: there is no reason the group governance couldn't evolve once BDFL is no longer effective.
20:17:41 < erichammond> I think there is room for further discussion on these topics, but I'm running out of time.  I withdraw my "what should it be?" part of the agenda.
20:18:13 < pleia2> nhaines: right, some teams even have a little "board" within the team made up of reps from different regions
20:18:16 < jdeslip> Flannel, NHaines, Grantbow etc may come and go and it is not clear what happens to the group.  Having some sort of democratic structure is a thing that lasts forever
20:18:31 < erichammond> Is there any indication of when the Team Leader is exercising their authority as that position and when they are merely expressing a personal opinion?
20:18:33 < Flannel> jdeslip: I am bound by the CoC, which requires me to step down considerably.
20:18:41 < pleia2> it might be appropriate for a team as large as CA, especially if folks see problems with the current single-leader situation
20:19:04 < Flannel> erichammond: On a number of occassions, I've specifically held back my comments on an issue precisely because I don't want people to shy away from expressing themselves
20:19:19 < nhaines> erichammond: Flannel usually abstains from discussions until the end, in consideration of not sounding authoritative during discussion.
20:19:26 < Grantbow> uh...
20:19:29 < jdeslip> Flannel:  But then what, someone else steps in and their are hurt feelings and the group fractures?  Better to make it official through election.
20:20:02 < nhaines> jdeslip: it is already official.
20:20:03 < jdeslip> Flannel:  The fact that you have to do that, I think illustrates the problem
20:20:10 < Flannel> jdeslip: If the group operates on consensus, then it already is "official"
20:20:11 < erichammond> I really appreciate folks' explaining how the team works.  I was not aware of most of this.
20:20:24 < kevin|demarest> the truth should trump feelings...sometimes feelings need to get hurt so  people will learn
20:20:27 < nhaines> erichammond: it's always good to be transparent about these things. :)
20:20:58 < Grantbow> nhaines: +1
20:21:21 < GidgetKitchen> I think it comes down to this- I would follow flannel into battle -- but I can't - he lives too far away
20:21:28 < erichammond> Is there anybody currently on the channel who disagrees that what has been explained is how the Ubuntu California team (as currently defined) works?
20:21:37 < nhaines> GidgetKitchen: we'll send a shuttle.
20:21:47 < Flannel> nhaines: It left CA the other day...
20:21:52 < GidgetKitchen> : )
20:21:57 < Grantbow> erichammond: approximately
20:22:15 < GidgetKitchen> maybe ther are regional differences in community
20:23:18 < jbermudes1> erichammond: that's how ive always seen it since i first joined
20:23:48 < kevin|demarest> erichammond: is there evidence somewhere to the contrary?
20:23:50 < Yasumoto_> erichammond: yes, I agree with the statements (as I read/interpreted them)
20:23:55 < nhaines> erichammond: that's how it was when I joined in September or October 2007.
20:24:45  * kevin|demarest thinks regular roadtrips would be a good idea :)
20:24:56 < Flannel> kevin|demarest: We just had one up to OSCON!
20:25:11 < Grantbow> Flannel: you mean CLS, right?
20:25:14 < Flannel> Does that wrap up that issue for tonight then?
20:25:41 < jdeslip> Ok, all, thanks for answering questions.  Gotta run.  My opinion is still that groups operate better, last longer under democratic structure.   But, I'll go with the flow for now.
20:25:49 < erichammond> Proposal: Summarize the current team structure and policies in a wiki page so that it is clear.
20:25:50  * Grantbow must run too - ttyl
20:26:07 < Yasumoto_> jdeslip + Grantbow see ya soon! :)
20:26:08 < nhaines> erichammond: that may be a good idea.
20:26:24 < Flannel> erichammond: We can certainly do that
20:26:38 < jbermudes1> erichammond: +1, it goes with the theme of transparency, :-)
20:26:47 < erichammond> For the few folks who care (and who are already aware) I would prefer not to be considered a member of Ubuntu California Team at this point (but it doesn't seem the bylaws support such :) )
20:27:10 < dragon> is the meeting over?
20:27:21 < nhaines> erichammond: membership is voluntary.
20:27:23 < erichammond> Off to feed my hungry family.  Thanks again.
20:27:32 < nhaines> erichammond: take care!
20:27:45 < dragon> looks like Grantbow took off..
20:28:02 < Flannel> erichammond: we're not going to force you, we just used the same metric we used for everyone else for the App
20:28:02 < Flannel> Alright, with that said, is this topic closed for tonight?
20:28:09 < Flannel> dragon: Almost
20:28:20 < dragon> ah, ok
20:28:22 < GidgetKitchen> was the first part of the meeting this interesting
20:28:24 < GidgetKitchen> ?
20:28:33 < kevin|demarest> I thought it was o/
20:28:37 < Flannel> Alright, with that, since we're fast approaching 90 minutes,
20:28:59 < Flannel> Karmic release is coming up, be sure to be thinking about what we want to do, since we'll be on the fast track on planning once the Jam is over
20:29:12 < Flannel> But, right now, concentrate on Jam topics!  Keep your eyes on the mailing list.
20:29:17 < pleia2> wait wait, who all is in SF and coming out for beers on Saturday? :)
20:29:44 < rww> I'm on the other side of a few bridges, but I'll be driving over :)
20:29:54 < pleia2> awesome \o/
20:30:26 < pleia2> I'm really looking forward to it :)
20:30:27 < kevin|demarest> I'm in LA
20:30:49 < dragon> pleia2: SF is an hour from here, but I'll consider coming over
20:30:57 < dragon> pleia2: where was it, again?
20:31:31 < pleia2> dragon: Thirsty
20:31:32 < pleia2> Bear Brewing Company
20:31:35 < rww> dragon: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-us-ca/2009-September/000805.html
20:31:48 < dragon> awesome, thanks pleia2 & rww
20:32:15 < Yasumoto_> man, you guys should drink a lot of beer for me since I can't make it out :(
20:32:28 < pleia2> Ohio LinuxFest is that day, I'm sort of sad I can't go so instead I'm saying "Well I get to hang out with the Ubuntu California pepole in SF instead!"
20:32:30 < kevin|demarest> don't drink to much, even though I won't be coming out :)
20:32:34 < kevin|demarest> *too
20:32:36 < kevin|demarest> arg
20:32:36 < pleia2> and since pleia2 loves SF more than Ohio, it's all good :)
20:33:22 < dragon> pleia2: i think i've seen you before - at the OSCON perhaps?
20:33:44 < pleia2> dragon: nope :\ I was at SELF
20:34:00 < nhaines> Let's keep talking about this immediately following the meeting.
20:34:18 < kevin|demarest> nhaines +1
20:34:20 < nhaines> And speaking of that, I think it's a wrap for today's meeting.  I want to thank everyone who was able to make it tonight.
20:34:41 < kevin|demarest> !huzzah
20:34:41 < Eureka> Yeah, dude!!!
20:34:51 < nhaines> Our next meeting is Sunday, October 4th, just after the Ubuntu Global Jam.  That's at 7:00pm PDT just as always.
20:34:55  * kevin|demarest is going to dinner
20:35:01 < kevin|demarest> ttyl
20:35:36 < nhaines> I'm excited to see a lot of you at the Global Jam and I'll catch the rest of you at the next meeting.  Until next time!

CaliforniaTeam/Meetings/09September20 (last edited 2009-10-21 05:50:49 by rww)