| Time | Nick | Message |
|---|---|---|
| 15:10 | mchua | oh. yes, it did. :) |
| 15:10 | sdziallas | #TOPIC Sugar on a Stick Meeting |
| 15:10 | #CHAIR mchua pbrobinson sdziallas SeanDaly JT4sugar satellit_Acer | |
| 15:10 | did I forget anybody? | |
| 15:11 | #LINK http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/S[…]k_meetings#Agenda | |
| 15:11 | Yes, that's our agenda for today! :) | |
| 15:11 | walterbender | sdziallas: hi |
| 15:11 | sdziallas | hi walterbender, hi kwurst! |
| 15:11 | kwurst | waves |
| 15:11 | SeanDaly | greets walterbender |
| 15:11 | phf | waves |
| 15:11 | sdziallas | hi phf! |
| 15:12 | looks like we've got quite a crowd today -- cool! | |
| 15:12 | uh, looking at that agenda, it says "name and colors". | |
| 15:12 | walterbender | sdziallas: the colors usually are implicit in the name |
| 15:12 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: since you're around, are you okay with raising this here? if we need more time, we can continue tomorrow, if that's okay. |
| 15:13 | walterbender: yup, right! (I don't think we should have chosen black for strawberry or something) | |
| 15:13 | mchua | notes we have a few new folks here today - mostly participants at http://teachingopensource.org/[…]E_Worcester_State, who are professors helping out with SoaS this week (by way of learning how to get their students involved as contributors to FOSS projects) |
| 15:13 | sdziallas | kwurst, phf: feel free to shout any questions in :) |
| 15:13 | walterbender | ginger is nice... sugar and spice |
| 15:13 | sdziallas | kwurst, phdf: we're basically running through the agenda to set the basics for the next (v.4) release of SoaS. |
| 15:13 | walterbender | maybe the Spice Girls can do a promo for us |
| 15:13 | mchua | We're also projecting the meeting here in the classroom, as you can see. :) |
| 15:14 | pbrobinson | walterbender: aren't they broken up? |
| 15:14 | sdziallas | coughs. :) |
| 15:14 | #TOPIC name & colors | |
| 15:14 | walterbender | pbrobinson: know idea. I am actually quite ignorant regarding them and their music |
| 15:14 | phf | thinks a reunion might be appropriate |
| 15:15 | SeanDaly | sdziallas: to be honest, the color/name is a symptom rather than a cause... we have a serious divergence of what role marketing should play. We need to discuss that, although here & now probably not the best moment. |
| 15:16 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: okay; I wonder how we do this best. would a thread on list help or should we devote a couple of minutes to this now? |
| 15:16 | everybody: thoughts? | |
| 15:16 | SeanDaly | walterbender: s/Sice Girls/Sugababes ? |
| 15:16 | satellit__ | lilikoi (Passion fruit) |
| 15:16 | sdziallas | satellit__: please add that to the wiki table with the agenda |
| 15:16 | satellit_Acer | ok |
| 15:17 | JT4sugar | sdziallas, My thought would be to reserve cloudberry for V5(we should target having SoaS working with Cloud services by next spring) and are we doing Berries/Fruit or Ice cream flavors? |
| 15:17 | pbrobinson | thinks possibly divert the name/colour discussion to another meeting where SeanDaly can outlie the marketing bit |
| 15:17 | SeanDaly | sdziallas: you mean flavors, or divergence of views? I think better to talk flavors right now |
| 15:18 | pbrobinson: thanks.. it is a marketing discussion after all... but why don't we express some flavors now too? | |
| 15:18 | sdziallas | Oh... well, if we've marketing here, we could go for it and out the cooperation of the different teams on the agenda for next week / another week. |
| 15:18 | #ACTION schedule another meeting / email thread regarding the cooperation of teams (such as SoaS & Marketing) | |
| 15:18 | mchua | notes that it's 17 minutes into the meeting time and we should probably just Pick A Name |
| 15:18 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: flavours are cool. was thinking more the marketing side of things |
| 15:19 | sdziallas | alrighty, everybody has the wiki agenda page open? |
| 15:19 | SeanDaly | Personally, I am an acolyte of Cloudberry for all the reasons previously stated... but that's only possible if wifi-3G and content offer up to par |
| 15:19 | sdziallas | I think I agree with JT4sugar, but that's me personally. |
| 15:19 | satellit_Acer | *lilikoi added |
| 15:20 | sdziallas | satellit__: thanks! |
| 15:20 | mchua | So... how *do* we pick a name? |
| 15:21 | walterbender | mchua: how about listing the suggestions on the table and then quick vote? |
| 15:21 | SeanDaly | JT4sugar: the original idea was ice cream flavors. But fruit works too ;-) |
| 15:21 | sdziallas | personally like Sweet Cream, but that's just him :) |
| 15:21 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: cloud stuff is a lot more IMO. Things like storing the journal online and other online storage colloboration |
| 15:21 | walterbender | sdziallas: you need to try the mocha from JPLicks next time you are in Boston |
| 15:22 | SeanDaly | mchua: marketing criteria: not too obscure, evokes colors |
| 15:22 | sdziallas | walterbender: August? :) |
| 15:22 | SeanDaly: that makes sense to me, yes. | |
| 15:22 | SeanDaly | pbrobnson, JT4sugar: good observations re Cloudberry |
| 15:22 | walterbender | sdziallas: a fine month for consuming large quantities of ice cream... |
| 15:22 | sdziallas | #LINK http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Marketing_Team/Logo |
| 15:22 | #INFO we need to follow the color guidelines for the branding | |
| 15:23 | mchua | rather likes Vanilla |
| 15:23 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: I think we need to make a bang with that name and make it stick so better waiting than jumping early |
| 15:24 | sdziallas | Alright, how about this: We pick *something* for now and refer to v.4 as that. Depending on how the 0.90 release cycle works out and how many cloud features are in there, we either rename it or go for v.5 for Cloudberry? |
| 15:24 | SeanDaly | sdziallas: in fact, Christian has been flexible.. Mirabelle was not in the standard logo scheme |
| 15:24 | pbrobinson: quite | |
| 15:24 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: oh yeah, you're right :) |
| 15:25 | JT4sugar | Everyone should go to Ice Cream Parlor this week and report back Great names you find and try. Cloudberry V5 +1 gives us a stretch goal |
| 15:25 | mchua | proposes we punt this topic to the end of the meeting and tackle the rest |
| 15:25 | phf | dreams of Straciatella |
| 15:25 | mchua | because we *need* a release schedule and a feature process and Activity criteria tomorrow. |
| 15:26 | SeanDaly | I feel like freeing myself from the tyranny of berries |
| 15:26 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: :) |
| 15:26 | mchua: DEAL. | |
| 15:26 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: YES to no berries! |
| 15:26 | sdziallas | has the meeting stick. sometimes. |
| 15:26 | mchua | The next agenda item is release schedule. |
| 15:26 | pbrobinson | hides so as to not get beaten by the stick |
| 15:26 | sdziallas | #INFO echo during the meeting mentions -1 to *-berry. |
| 15:26 | #INFO names & colors pushed back | |
| 15:27 | #TOPIC release schedule | |
| 15:27 | mchua | #LINK http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/S[…]#Release_schedule |
| 15:27 | sdziallas | that should be straight forward. |
| 15:27 | SeanDaly | mchua: vanilla is to often associated with "plain"... which is why in the supermarket, most vanilla ice cream is labeled "French Vanilla" even though the vanilla comes from Madagascar |
| 15:27 | mchua | Yeah, it's written, just needs sanity-checking and +1 if there are no objections. |
| 15:27 | sdziallas | if nobody has further comments, I'll just approve that. |
| 15:27 | pbrobinson | I would like to +10 following the fedora schedule. It kept us very focussed |
| 15:28 | mchua | I like the schedule. Don't see a reason to change it. |
| 15:28 | would like to note that if Fedora's schedule slips upstream, ours does too. | |
| 15:29 | walterbender | pbrobinson: yes.. and we should plan our features accordingly |
| 15:29 | sdziallas | #INFO if Fedora slips, we will, too. there will be an early enough notification, though. |
| 15:29 | alright, so we're game here? | |
| 15:29 | walterbender | pbrobinson: which is why this will *not* be the Cloudberry release :( |
| 15:30 | sdziallas | #AGREED release schedule for v.4 approved as outlined in the wiki |
| 15:30 | awesome, moving on. | |
| 15:30 | pbrobinson | #INFO we need to follow the feature side of that closer as that's what caught us the last time |
| 15:30 | sdziallas | #TOPIC feature process for v.4 |
| 15:30 | pbrobinson: exactly! so that's our topic now :) | |
| 15:31 | #LINK http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/S[…]s#Feature_process | |
| 15:31 | pbrobinson | I would like to propose the core sucrose 0.90 release as the main feature |
| 15:31 | JT4sugar | sdziallas, Question on Fedora schedule there is also Feature date on 7-13 how does that apply to us. Do all activities/featuresaccepted on 7/27 need to be identified by 7/13 |
| 15:31 | sdziallas | #IDEA pbrobinson suggests the 0.90 as main feature |
| 15:31 | pbrobinson | Its going to take a lot of work due to massive upstream project changes |
| 15:32 | sdziallas | #LINK http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/[…]eases/14/Schedule |
| 15:32 | (JT4sugar is talking about that.) | |
| 15:32 | pbrobinson | not just 0.90 but 0.90 and the core fructose Activities |
| 15:32 | mchua | I'd like to start the feature selection process next meeting, after we approve a feature process. ;) |
| 15:32 | but that's a good one to queue up, yeah. | |
| 15:32 | pbrobinson | LOL. Sorry, my bad! |
| 15:32 | sdziallas | JT4sugar: we're presumably only going to have a small process, so we're just sticking 7/27 in there as the major deadline. |
| 15:33 | SeanDaly | bumped by 3G card... any way to see what I missed? |
| 15:33 | mchua | SeanDaly: I'll try to get you a link to the logs, hang on. |
| 15:33 | sdziallas: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/S[…]s#Feature_process ? | |
| 15:33 | kicks meeting along | |
| 15:33 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: http://me.etin.gs/sugar-meetin[…]0100607_1510.html |
| 15:33 | mchua: :) (^^) | |
| 15:33 | mchua: exactly. | |
| 15:33 | mchua | sdziallas: you type faster :P |
| 15:34 | sdziallas | mchua: sometimes. |
| 15:34 | mchua | cheers for #topic change |
| 15:34 | Anyhow. | |
| 15:34 | sdziallas | everyone: does the outlined bullet points make sense? |
| 15:34 | if so, we'll make a call on the decision method. | |
| 15:35 | JT4sugar | sdziallas, Just want to verify want to make sure key activities for literacy like read, getbooks, and others are in activity bundle |
| 15:35 | mchua | they make sense to me, but I'm looking forward to the feature owners telling us what's still confusing as we go along. :) |
| 15:35 | JT4sugar: Propose them as features, and make sure they have an owner who'll develop and maintain them, and they can be in the Activity bundle. | |
| 15:35 | sdziallas | mchua: now this time you typed faster. :) |
| 15:36 | mchua | JT4sugar: I mean, I think they're all good ideas, but we mostly need people to step up and do the work. ;) Happy to teach, if you're interested in learning how to pick some of it up yourself. |
| 15:36 | satellit__ | http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/F[…]n_Kit_DVD#Summary (Is already existing just needs approval) |
| 15:36 | mchua | can't teach packaging and such, but can do most of it. |
| 15:36 | pbrobinson | and TEST them! |
| 15:36 | sdziallas | satellit__: we're first deciding on the process, then on the features themselves :) |
| 15:36 | mchua | Sounds like we have some features queueing up for next meeting when we have our process in place. :) |
| 15:36 | satellit__ | ok |
| 15:37 | sdziallas | Okay, I'll note the feature process as approved and ask for the decision method then. |
| 15:37 | pbrobinson | satellit__: we're not talking the feature but the actual process of summiting and getting features approved |
| 15:37 | sdziallas | #AGREED feature process as outlines in the wiki is approved and will be followed |
| 15:37 | I'd be interested in thoughts about the voting proposals on the wiki. | |
| 15:39 | SeanDaly | note to sdziallas: the SoaS scope approach is related to Sugar Labs marketing vs. SoaS marketing problem |
| 15:39 | JT4sugar | mchua, So if I am getting this correctly each activity included on the SoaS version is going to be a Feature? Yes? |
| 15:39 | mchua | I should note that I don't expect those voting proposals to scale very well - they're just something to get us started. |
| 15:39 | And when the Feature Approval Voting Mechanism we pick right now can no longer handle the volume of incoming "please include this feature!!!" requests, then we can change it. | |
| 15:39 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: uh, scope? |
| 15:39 | sorry :) | |
| 15:39 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: yes and no on the marketing |
| 15:39 | mchua | JT4sugar: I would consider "$foo Activity is included in the SoaS build" as a feature, personally. |
| 15:40 | JT4sugar: Though the feature process would have to agree with me there. :) But that's what I'm thinking. | |
| 15:40 | pbrobinson | JT4sugar: yes. Except for the core Sucrose activities which is a core Feature in and of itself |
| 15:40 | sdziallas | would like to work this through one by one. |
| 15:40 | mchua | JT4sugar: or in other words, I am proposing that that be the case, yeah. |
| 15:41 | phf | admires the chaos |
| 15:41 | sdziallas | phf: TEH CHAOZZZZ!!! ITZ HERE!!! |
| 15:41 | alright, so. | |
| 15:41 | mchua | Personally, I don't care what the voting mechanism is, as long as we *have* one. |
| 15:41 | We can always change it. | |
| 15:41 | SeanDaly | sdziallas: SL marketing approach=how to win over teachers; SoaS marketing approach=enumerating features |
| 15:42 | sdziallas | JT4sugar: does this answer your question and can we agree on that? |
| 15:42 | mchua | can haz feature approval process? We need to know because we're hoping to have the POSSE group submit some stuff for consideration... er... starting tomorrow... |
| 15:42 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: I don't think we should prevent Marketing from picking things to promote from this feature list. |
| 15:43 | JT4sugar | mchua, Just trying to clarify this, I'm not sure that activity folks who would want their activities included understand. If this is the policy I understand and am ok just want to get word out |
| 15:43 | satellit__ | so an approved feature is included in the build of the spin? |
| 15:43 | mchua | JT4sugar: The thing is that we don't have a policy yet, that is what we are trying to create right now. |
| 15:43 | JT4sugar: Once we have made that decision (real soon now, I hope) then yes, help spreading the word would be fantastic. | |
| 15:43 | satellit__: Yes, aiui. | |
| 15:43 | SeanDaly | sdziallas: no, there's no preventing; but the approach guarantees SL marketing is at the end of the train |
| 15:44 | satellit__ | * or is it a separate feature approved for use with Soas name (the DVD is a separate DL) |
| 15:44 | JT4sugar | mchua, That's why collaboration is so fantastic! |
| 15:44 | mchua | SeanDaly: The thing is that Marketing can't tell volunteer engineers what to work on - they can *suggest* it, but whether the work actually gets done and *can* be included as a feature depends on what individuals are motivated to pick up and code and maintain. |
| 15:45 | SeanDaly: So if Marketing wants a feature in the build, the best thing it can do is try to persuade developers to do the technical work needed to get it through the feature process. | |
| 15:45 | So that it can be approved as a feature, so that Marketing can in fact guarantee it will be shipped in the live image, and market that release accordingly. | |
| 15:45 | SeanDaly | mchua: I quite agree... and the inverse is true... if the engineers tell marketing what can be worked on, the result is ineffective marketing |
| 15:46 | sdziallas | Maybe we can make a call on the decision process and put this here in the SoaS <-> Marketing convo? |
| 15:46 | mchua | SeanDaly: I think this discussion may be orthogonal to the creation of an engineering feature approval process - once we have a decision mechanism for how to include technical things, then we can talk (perhaps at tomorrow's Marketing meeting) about how the Marketing <--> Engineering dynamic should work. |
| 15:46 | sdziallas: jinx. | |
| 15:47 | *really* needs a feature process for POSSE attendees tomorrow | |
| 15:47 | SeanDaly | mchua: yes, as I say there's an incompatibility problem which needs to be resolved |
| 15:48 | mchua | SeanDaly: And it can be resolved after we figure out a way to declare something a technical feature for inclusion in the build - we don't need to block this decision on the resolution of that conversation. |
| 15:48 | does agree that conversation needs to be resolved, though. | |
| 15:48 | sdziallas | Alright, I propose that the current release team (mchua, pbrobinson, me) for SoaS will approve features as requested per proposal and will discuss in weekly meetings and announce decisions on list. |
| 15:48 | thinks so too, for the record (that we need to work this out) | |
| 15:48 | mchua | sdziallas: so a feature proposal needs to be +1'd by at least 2 of {mchua, sdziallas, pbrobinson} in order to become a feature? |
| 15:49 | JT4sugar | mchua, My key question is does the 7/13 date on Fedora schedule affect our activities or features I understand 7/27 is Drop dead date |
| 15:49 | mchua | sdziallas: (for v4 release, at least) |
| 15:49 | SeanDaly | mchua: what is needed is a way to prioritize "features"... e-readers need to be high priority for example. |
| 15:49 | sdziallas | JT4sugar: 7/27 is in the approved schedule. so it's 7/27 :) |
| 15:49 | mchua | JT4sugar: in other words, "no" |
| 15:49 | sdziallas | mchua: yes. (also: less bottlenecks) |
| 15:49 | JT4sugar | Thank you |
| 15:49 | mchua | JT4sugar: we have a little extra time, on account of we're a smaller project (...so far ;) |
| 15:49 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: agreed. So are you offering to do some testing on the eReader stuff to ensure its a feature? |
| 15:50 | mchua | SeanDaly: I'd say Marketing can prioritize recruitment for development work on any feature proposals they'd like. :) |
| 15:50 | SeanDaly | pbrobinson: yes - I offered to organize such testing |
| 15:50 | mchua | SeanDaly: so if Marketing thinks e-readers are important, they can focus their energies on recruiting development work for the e-reader feature proposals - "this is the most important feature proposal to work on!" |
| 15:50 | that's Marketing's decision, imo. | |
| 15:50 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: we need to get someone to fix Read first. |
| 15:50 | sdziallas | Can we please agree on the voting process here? |
| 15:50 | pbrobinson | +1 on the voting |
| 15:51 | mchua | sdziallas: +1 too. |
| 15:51 | satellit__ | +1 |
| 15:51 | JT4sugar | +1 |
| 15:51 | SeanDaly | mchua: "marketing" goals are strategic goals for Sugar Labs... not nice-to-have features |
| 15:51 | sdziallas | alright. awesome! (I'd rather have more people on that than just a "release manager", so... I'm obviously +1, too) |
| 15:51 | mchua | APPROVED |
| 15:51 | (I think) | |
| 15:52 | SeanDaly | pbrobinson: Samy got read working in the Saint Nick of time for Nosy Komba deployment this week |
| 15:52 | sdziallas | #AGREED voting process for feature process is approved: mchua, pbrobinson and sdziallas will as the release team will discuss feature proposals at the weekly meetings and announce decisions to the appropriate lists |
| 15:52 | SeanDaly | pbrobinson: he added missing packages.. no idea if that can be done cleanly for SoaS though |
| 15:52 | sdziallas | next one? (I'm sorry for rushing a little here) |
| 15:53 | #TOPIC activity inclusion criteria | |
| 15:53 | mchua | #LINK http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/S[…]Activity_Criteria |
| 15:53 | sdziallas | mchua: I think that's yours, right? activities have to meet this to get approved for... well, inclusion. :) |
| 15:53 | mchua | Yep. Basically looking for a "what is missing?" sanity check on this page, here. |
| 15:53 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: so is stability and my sanity a required feature... I had to drop the later to get the release done :-) |
| 15:54 | mchua | An Activity is a specific type of Feature - when the feature-approval-team looks at an Activity that's been submitted for consideration as a feature, I'm proposing that those are the criteria we check to see whether it's "ready." |
| 15:54 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: believe me missing packages wasn't the problem in SoaS. It was changes in API |
| 15:55 | sdziallas | mchua: I think it looks good. There are a few things like "how to check" that we might add, but I believe we can add that over the time as we figure it out. |
| 15:55 | walterbender | thinks that much of the issue was communication... |
| 15:55 | SeanDaly | pbrobinson: yes you had told me problem was difficult to foresee until late |
| 15:56 | sdziallas | basically, the Gnome upstream folks made a change that broke Read and nobody noticed until it was way too late (it's not fixed and the author says it looks like a major change). If we had noticed it before, it'd have been better, yes. |
| 15:56 | (that's from what I recall) | |
| 15:56 | votes +1 on activity inclusion criteria. | |
| 15:57 | SeanDaly | sdziallas: how about a mechanism for prioritizing? |
| 15:57 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: problem wasn't difficult. It would have been picked up a lot earlier if someone had tested it. sdziallas and I had our work held out on core OS/UI functionality. It had been broken for months which showed _NO_ one bothered to test it |
| 15:58 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: I think we should probably discuss adding this to the feature process itself... (what do others think?) |
| 15:58 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: satellit__ was the one that picked it up. |
| 15:58 | SeanDaly | pbrobinson: we are alas! short-handed on all sides... |
| 15:59 | sdziallas | would like to ask for votes :) |
| 15:59 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: but if eReaders was what you wanted I expect you to test that functionality and report problems. Apparently it didn't matter enough for that to happen |
| 15:59 | satellit__ | * it looked like it worked but had nothing to read....till I tested it by adding items it should have read to the journal--nasty to find |
| 15:59 | pbrobinson | sdziallas: you mentioned adding something to the feature process itself. Was that the testing component? |
| 16:00 | SeanDaly | FYI re translation (Pootle): our contacts at the EU want to be sure SoaS (which will include Activities) be available in official EU languages |
| 16:00 | sdziallas | pbrobinson: what I'm saying is that marketing could add tags to feature proposals about their proposed priority. |
| 16:00 | SeanDaly | pbrobinson: no, not a question of not mattering, a question of being short-handed |
| 16:01 | sdziallas | (I just want to get this activity inclusion thing done for now; we can extend the feature proposal tomorrow in the marketing meeting) |
| 16:01 | pbrobinson | sdziallas: OK, sounds good as one of the feature matrix options so we're aware of those. |
| 16:01 | so with the marketing prioroty I +1 it | |
| 16:01 | JT4sugar | Literacy tools are at the core of everyones "Learning How to Learn" foundation. I want to make sure we have an open and collaborative arrangment in place for those activity authors or maintainers to interface with SoaS team to solve. Having testing days for core learning functionality may be an idea |
| 16:01 | SeanDaly | pbrobinson: it's not "marketing wants"... it's "what s the fundamental promise of Sugar"... |
| 16:01 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: I really don't oppose adding a "Priority" line to the wiki feature proposal pages. :) (we need to make sure this gets communicated to the lists, though) |
| 16:02 | pbrobinson: uh, I'd add the marketing priority thing to the feature proposals, while this vote would be now activity inclusion criteria. | |
| 16:02 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: can you write the EU language requirements up. As a feature point or elsewhere. I think that would be a great feature |
| 16:02 | sdziallas | Can we please get through the agenda first now? |
| 16:02 | SeanDaly | pbrobinson: will do |
| 16:03 | pbrobinson | sdziallas: ah, sorry. Still +1 though :-D |
| 16:03 | sdziallas | I'm very much willing to discuss prioritizing and believe it *will* certainly help us, but let's do one step at a time. (we should do the second one very soon, admittedly.) |
| 16:03 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: thanks! |
| 16:04 | sdziallas | Any other votes on the criteria? Folks, this *is* what we will use to decide on the inclusion of activities. |
| 16:04 | satellit__ | +1 |
| 16:04 | mchua | likes it, but I have a blind spot since I wrote much of the proposal (with major patches by walterbender) |
| 16:04 | So a biased +1 from me, for the record. | |
| 16:04 | JT4sugar | +1 |
| 16:04 | mchua | And again, we can change the criteria if they end up being insufficient or too onerous. |
| 16:05 | sdziallas | #AGREED activity inclusion criteria will be used and applied to requests |
| 16:05 | (thank you everybody!) | |
| 16:05 | mchua | (but if we do that, I would suggest that any Activities approved for the release remain approved for the release, even if they don't meet the new criteria - just to be fair.) |
| 16:05 | sdziallas | lets see, what else is there? |
| 16:05 | mchua: makes sense. | |
| 16:05 | mchua | test-dev-release cycle, but we're over time so we may want to punt that to the next meeting since there's no proposal to vote on. |
| 16:05 | sdziallas | mchua: indeed! |
| 16:05 | mchua | satellit__: (were you going to draft a first round of that process up? or is that something I was supposed to do and forgot?) |
| 16:06 | walterbender | AFAIK there are *no* activities that meet all of the criteria |
| 16:06 | mchua | walterbender: Yeah, not for the v3 release... we did not have *any* criteria for that |
| 16:06 | sdziallas | I'd like to suggest moving name & color convos to another meeting, possibly marketing tomorrow, or next week. whatever works best. |
| 16:06 | walterbender: well, then we gotta make them fit 'em :) | |
| 16:06 | thinks talk is cheap, though. | |
| 16:06 | pbrobinson | mchua: agreed they remain in unless they're not complete or don't work as expected at which point they get dropped like any other feature |
| 16:06 | mchua | we started drafting these criteria for v3 because we realized that all Activity inclusion was arbitrary and that was landing us in a Bad Place. |
| 16:06 | walterbender | sdziallas: I had started a table on the Talk page... |
| 16:06 | mchua | (Bad Place == |
| 16:06 | SeanDaly | sdziallas: perhaps it is implied (ASLO ref?), but a free license seems to me to be an importan criteria |
| 16:07 | sdziallas | walterbender: yeah, I saw that... actually, let me look at that again, it looke dreally cool! |
| 16:07 | mchua | "we don't sleep for a few nights before release") |
| 16:07 | satellit__ | mchua: No I submitted my feature on wiki and on soas lists did not know about criteria |
| 16:07 | sdziallas | satellit__: we are still working the process out. |
| 16:07 | SeanDaly: oh, you've a good point there! | |
| 16:07 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: free licence is compulary to get it into Fedora |
| 16:07 | sdziallas | SeanDaly: it is implied there, but... dunno, maybe worth mentioning? |
| 16:07 | mchua | Yeah, I didn't explicitly list licensing reqs since it's a hard dependency... |
| 16:07 | sdziallas | #INFO name & color discussion shifts |
| 16:07 | mchua | ...I can edit that into the "must be packaged" section though. |
| 16:07 | SeanDaly | pbrobinson,sdziallas: worth mentioning please |
| 16:08 | walterbender | mchua: licensing in our case is pretty straight forward... |
| 16:08 | pbrobinson | SeanDaly: agreed! |
| 16:08 | walterbender | mchua: we sorted that one out a few months ago... |
| 16:08 | JT4sugar | An email from SoaS Team to the Activity community with these draft Inclusion Criteria should be sent out so they can begin the work to make them fit |
| 16:08 | SeanDaly | completeness better than assuming people will already know stuff |
| 16:08 | sdziallas | JT4sugar: agreed! |
| 16:08 | mchua | satellit__: I was referring to the "how do we want to set up the dev/test/release cycle for v4?" question, and the "hm, someone should write a first-draft proposal on how we want to do that" note - I thought "someone" was you, but it may have been me and I may have just forgotten to do it. |
| 16:08 | sdziallas | #ACTION send email to the activity community about inclusion criteria |
| 16:08 | any takers? | |
| 16:09 | notes we're overtime. | |
| 16:09 | mchua | Yeah, but not too badly. |
| 16:09 | satellit__ | * I can try to suggest some ideas later to list |
| 16:09 | sdziallas | Okay, if nobody does, I'll take the "notify activity community" one with a short email. |
| 16:09 | mchua | satellit__: ok, we should ask sdziallas to #action you on that for next time then :) |
| 16:10 | sdziallas | mchua: you can do that yourself :) |
| 16:10 | mchua | sdziallas: did JT4sugar want to take it? |
| 16:10 | satellit__ | ok |
| 16:10 | mchua | oh! I'm a chair? |
| 16:10 | ok. | |
| 16:10 | #action satellit__ draft dev/test/release cycle proposal to soas list | |
| 16:10 | sdziallas | mchua: you're not *a* chair, but... chairing... y'know. |
| 16:10 | mchua | satellit__: and then, the next weekly meeting after the draft is done, we'll bring it up as a topic for revision/approval. |
| 16:10 | sdziallas | thinks his non-native-english-fu is... strange :) |
| 16:10 | satellit__ | k |
| 16:10 | mchua | satellit__: so if it's done by next meeting, we'll bring it up then, if it's not drafted by next meeting we'll wait until after it is. |
| 16:10 | sdziallas | JT4sugar: oh, did you want to? I'm rushing too much, possibly. |
| 16:11 | mchua | JT4sugar proposed the email, so... |
| 16:11 | satellit__ | * multiple working hypotheses...: ) |
| 16:11 | mchua | but yeah, we don't need to block meeting-end on it, can ping JT4sugar after meeting to see if he wants to take it. |
| 16:11 | JT4sugar | I think it would sound best coming from one of the project leads |
| 16:11 | mchua | sounds like sdziallas has it, then. |
| 16:12 | sdziallas | okeydokey. |
| 16:12 | mchua | thinks we're done. |
| 16:12 | sdziallas | anything else? |
| 16:12 | mchua | eats a brownie |
| 16:12 | sdziallas | awesome! thank you folks, this was quite productive! |
| 16:12 | phf | ah more brownies left :-D |
| 16:12 | sdziallas | #endmeeting |