16:04:01 #startmeeting FAmSCO 2014-08-26 16:04:01 Meeting started Tue Aug 26 16:04:01 2014 UTC. The chair is cwickert. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:04:01 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:04:07 #meetingname FAmSCO 2014-08-26 16:04:07 The meeting name has been set to 'famsco_2014-08-26' 16:04:38 #topic Roll call 16:05:09 .fas cwickert 16:05:11 cwickert: cwickert 'Christoph Wickert' 16:05:48 #info sesivany is in vacation, tuanta sent regrets 16:06:30 * masta is here 16:06:51 ping robyduck lbazan yn1v 16:06:54 #chair masta 16:06:54 Current chairs: cwickert masta 16:07:02 chair robyduck lbazan 16:08:22 hmmm 16:08:24 :( 16:08:50 * cwickert waits another 5 minutes before closing the meeting due to the lack of participation 16:09:18 I have nothing, so yes... wait a few minutes, then move to close. 16:11:34 masta: that would have been my next question. unless you have anything on your mind, we just cancel the meeting 16:12:47 thank you cwickert 16:12:55 * masta wanders off 16:12:56 :) 16:14:18 * lbazan here 16:14:24 .fas lbazan 16:14:25 lbazan: lbazan 'Luis Enrique Bazán De León' 16:14:42 cwickert: :-) 16:14:50 .fas robyduck 16:14:51 robyduck: robyduck 'Robert Mayr' 16:15:00 oh come on guys 16:15:08 masta: still around? 16:15:10 sorry,I'm still om the train... 16:16:09 tuanta send regrets today! 16:16:27 I already said that ;) 16:16:50 cwickert: :o :P 16:18:16 so we have three famsco members 16:18:24 cwickert: masta ? 16:18:28 of which one is on a train and the other still at work (me) 16:18:29 seems so 16:18:39 cwickert: ok 16:18:39 lbazan: masta left because you and robyduck were not present 16:18:49 I think we should just cancel the meeting 16:19:00 and think about if this timeslot still works for us 16:19:12 * robyduck is sorry for that 16:19:21 it's not the best for me, but I'm afraid we won't find a better time 16:19:22 * lbazan :S 16:19:42 lbazan, robyduck: anything you want to discuss? 16:20:00 well we have a ticket but we can't vote today 16:20:17 and I modified the ambassadors wiki page, maybe we can discuss that a bit 16:20:20 robyduck: 367 16:20:24 * robyduck looks for link 16:20:34 .famsco 367 16:20:34 https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/367 16:21:56 * cwickert is conflicted about this 16:22:21 cwickert: it came up during the last EMEA meeting 16:22:27 robyduck: do the mentors support that? 16:22:37 robyduck: you send this to the mentor list? 16:22:44 right 16:22:45 no 16:23:01 we have been talking about formalizing the process to become a mentor 16:23:06 we don't have the new process actually, do we? 16:23:12 this would be a good exercise 16:23:34 robyduck: well, the current process is hardly defined, but requires that the mentors agree 16:23:36 did they? 16:23:53 #topic Re-appoint Paul Mellors as mentor for EMEA 16:23:57 no, they don't 16:24:10 ok then, then please bring it up on the mentors list first 16:24:18 as I said, I followed th old process, famsco members can propose mentors 16:24:33 but I'm ok with that, let me send that to the list ASAP 16:24:48 and next week we can vote, ok? 16:24:57 (hopefully) 16:24:59 robyduck: that is not correct 16:25:06 the current policy is "Prospective mentors are nominated by existing Mentors and confirmed by FAmSCo" 16:25:31 actually this wording is vague 16:25:36 cwickert: in the regional meeting nominate and the ambassador say +1 or -1 16:25:47 isn't it "by existing mentors or FAmSCo member"? 16:26:19 anyway, we also need to define that better in the next weeks ;) 16:26:25 robyduck: I would disagree. Say a single mentor nominates somebody but all others reject the candidate. would you then want famsco to approve him? 16:26:52 lbazan: please no, let us not make the mentors a bottom up group. it should be invite only 16:27:00 no, surely not. And I'm strongly for having the proposed changes in the mentors process 16:27:14 cwickert: +1 16:27:18 ok, then try to get it started, let's ee how it works out 16:27:24 cwickert: ok 16:27:40 #action robyduck to reach out to the mentors list about ticket #367 16:27:47 cwickert: thx 16:27:52 and then we will revisit this next week, thanks 16:28:10 :-) 16:28:33 cwickert: may I have your opinion also about https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/MembershipService#Inactive_Ambassadors 16:29:01 lbazan: one last word on this: I think that groups like mentors or packager sponsors should really be meritocratic, this means the existing mentors or sponsors ask prospective candidates 16:29:13 and not having people who are not mentors having vote about it 16:29:25 anyway, on to robyduck's question 16:30:16 cwickert: ok 16:30:17 robyduck: this is your proposal or was this already agreed upon` 16:30:18 ? 16:30:21 cwickert: we discussed this last week and we saw we never updated the wiki to proceed 16:30:27 robyduck: +1 16:31:04 we decided months ago to do that, the process should be like this, also after the discussion in the ML 16:31:19 robyduck: but as far as I remember the previous discussions, we said we would not revoke the ambassadors status but only set people to inactive 16:31:33 I'm pretty sure we even voted about this 16:31:33 yes, and that's what I wrote 16:31:36 no 16:32:03 IMHO yes, "set as inactive" 16:32:04 "remove from 'ambassadors' group in Fedora Account System" means you revoke their status 16:32:32 they would have to re-apply and be sponsored again, thus you remove their ambassadors membership 16:32:49 where did I write this? I'm blind atm 16:33:02 ah no, cwickert 16:33:14 cwickert: I wrote only the last paragraph! 16:33:25 *Inactive Ambassadors* 16:34:16 wow 16:34:28 I think the wiki describes something we never really agreed to 16:34:36 * cwickert browses the history 16:34:50 #topic "Inactive Ambassadors (again)" 16:36:47 ok, so, it seems as these steps were added by kital, however he had a different use case in mind 16:37:07 this was meant for people who WANT to leave 16:37:15 and not for people who are declared inactive 16:37:52 I think this needs further discussion before we ratify this 16:38:14 robyduck: can you mark your proposal as "under discussion" or so` 16:38:15 ? 16:38:17 cwickert: you are speaking about the paragraph above, right? 16:38:43 robyduck: yes, but in combination with your paragraph, it has a totally different meaning 16:38:51 ok, I agree 16:39:03 there have been changes to the wikipage and I am still trying to figure out what happened 16:39:07 because above it says we will remove him from the FAS after 6 months 16:39:34 #action cwickert to get in touch with kital for clarification of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/MembershipService#Inactive_Ambassadors 16:39:38 am I chair? 16:39:44 yes you are 16:39:45 ah ok, you did, cool 16:40:24 #action robyduck to set the 'inactive ambassadors' paragraph to *under discussion* 16:40:28 robyduck: I really don't know the backlog and I don't want to make a decision without contacting kital first. not to mention we don't have a quorum anyway 16:40:34 robyduck: thanks! 16:40:42 ok, I'm fine with it 16:40:52 anything else? 16:41:55 FUDCon LATAM perhaps? 16:42:27 robyduck: nop 16:42:31 robyduck: logo? 16:42:44 is that a yes or no? 16:42:46 :) 16:42:52 lbazan: do you have it? 16:42:54 haha 16:42:58 to discuss or not to discuss, that is the question 16:43:06 cwickert: nope 16:43:07 #topic FUDCon LATAM 16:43:29 cwickert: yn1v have more info about fudcon 16:43:39 ok 16:43:50 so nothing on FUDCon LATAM then? 16:44:20 nop 16:44:31 then let's end it for today 16:44:44 wait for next week .. 16:44:57 cwickert: endmeeting :-) 16:45:08 * cwickert is glad he changed the topic ;) 16:45:15 #endmeeting