14:01:12 <giannisk> #startmeeting FAmSCo 2016-03-23
14:01:12 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Mar 23 14:01:12 2016 UTC.  The chair is giannisk. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:01:12 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:01:12 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'famsco_2016-03-23'
14:01:17 <giannisk> #meetingname famsco
14:01:17 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'famsco'
14:01:22 <giannisk> #topic Roll Call
14:01:24 <tuanta> .fas tuanta
14:01:25 <giannisk> .fas giannisk
14:01:27 <zodbot> tuanta: tuanta 'Truong Anh Tuan' <tuanta@iwayvietnam.com>
14:01:28 <cwickert> .fas cwickert
14:01:29 <zodbot> giannisk: giannisk 'Giannis Konstantinidis' <giannis@konstantinidis.cc>
14:01:32 <zodbot> cwickert: cwickert 'Christoph Wickert' <christoph.wickert@gmail.com>
14:01:47 <potty> .hello potty
14:01:48 <zodbot> potty: potty 'Abdel G. Martínez L.' <abdel.g.martinez.l@gmail.com>
14:01:48 <giannisk> Hello everyone and welcome.
14:02:15 <cwickert> #info we have a quorum (4/7)
14:02:28 <cwickert> should we wait for others?
14:02:38 <tuanta> yes, great to see we got quorum today
14:02:45 <potty> lbazan cant attend
14:02:45 <cwickert> AFAICS nopbody sent regrets
14:02:46 <giannisk> Has anyone from the others notified about their absense?
14:02:53 <giannisk> cwickert: yes
14:03:04 <giannisk> cwickert: about the nobody sent regrets thing
14:03:49 <giannisk> Okay, let's move on.
14:03:55 <potty> In fact he said he will connect in 10 minutes
14:04:05 <giannisk> #topic Final appointment of chair
14:04:14 <cwickert> !
14:04:21 <giannisk> Okay, its has been agreed that we are going to conduct another round of elections.
14:04:28 <giannisk> cwickert: please go ahead
14:04:38 <cwickert> As we have only 4 people here, I suggest we do this in trac
14:04:52 <cwickert> both nominations and voting
14:04:55 <potty> +1
14:05:24 <tuanta> +1. However, today, we should decide the deadlines for both nomination and voting
14:05:29 <giannisk> cwickert: agreed, I guess we have also agreed that all votings will take place on trac from now on
14:05:31 <tuanta> is that ok?
14:05:33 <cwickert> tuanta: +1
14:05:44 <cwickert> giannisk: +1
14:06:23 <giannisk> who is available to open up a ticket for this?
14:06:30 * cwickert can do it
14:06:32 <tuanta> I propose we set a week for nomination (from today) and another week for voting
14:06:37 <giannisk> thanks cwickert
14:06:39 <cwickert> tuanta: ⁺+
14:06:49 <giannisk> #agreed re-elections to take place on trac
14:07:05 <cwickert> is everybody ok with the timeframe tuanta suggested?
14:07:09 <giannisk> #action cwickert to create a new ticket regarding the elections
14:07:35 <giannisk> tuanta: +1, sounds fair
14:08:02 <potty> +1
14:08:19 <tuanta> should we have a specific time?
14:08:32 <giannisk> #agreed timeframe set to 1 week for nominations and another week for voting
14:08:42 <giannisk> tuanta: we should start -today- I guess
14:08:49 <cwickert> tuanta: I'll create the ticket during this meeting, so the time will end at 15:59:59 UTC
14:08:58 <cwickert> sounds fine?
14:09:04 <giannisk> cwickert: go ahead, +1
14:09:12 <tuanta> +1 cwickert
14:10:02 <tuanta> so deadline for nomination is after next week meeting (end of Wednesday) - just for clarification
14:10:07 <tuanta> is that right?
14:10:13 <cwickert> right
14:10:47 <giannisk> 15:59:59 UTC - March 30th
14:10:53 <cwickert> ack
14:11:01 <tuanta> cool :)
14:11:14 <giannisk> #info Deadline for nominations is 15:59:59 UTC, on March 30th
14:11:33 <giannisk> Everything set for now? Any questions? Anything to add?
14:11:51 * lbazan here
14:12:01 * lbazan morning!
14:12:01 * giannisk waves at lbazan
14:12:07 <cwickert> hi lbazan
14:12:19 <lbazan> saludos!
14:13:05 <giannisk> Okay, let's move on.
14:13:20 <giannisk> #topic Lazy consensus proposal
14:13:27 <giannisk> #link https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/390
14:13:56 <giannisk> #link https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/391
14:14:05 <giannisk> Will be closing #391 in favour of #390
14:14:37 <giannisk> #info Will be closing #391, discussion to be continued under #390
14:14:54 <giannisk> The majority agrees with lazy consensus
14:14:54 <cwickert> cool, thanks
14:14:59 <giannisk> We need to settle on a timeframe
14:15:04 <lbazan> ok
14:15:20 <cwickert> Hold on
14:15:27 <giannisk> It's going to be 1 week or 5 days, from what I have seen.
14:15:44 <cwickert> as we have no lazy consensus yet and Sirko was opposed, I think we should have a vote, just for the record
14:16:01 <cwickert> we can quickly vote here, we are five people, so we can overpower anybody anway
14:16:17 <giannisk> cwickert: we're definitely going to have a vote, yes
14:16:29 <cwickert> I just want to have this #agreed in the meeting logs for the record
14:16:35 <giannisk> I'm +1 to lazy consensus, timeframe to be determined shortly afterwards
14:16:39 <cwickert> +1
14:16:42 <giannisk> cwickert: yeap
14:17:02 <cwickert> lbazan, tuanta, potty: cast your votes
14:17:17 <lbazan> +1
14:17:36 <tuanta> +1
14:17:46 <tuanta> ping potty
14:18:24 <lbazan> potty
14:18:34 * potty waves
14:18:51 <potty> +1 cwickert
14:19:01 <giannisk> Perfect, 5 out of 7 is even better.
14:19:02 <cwickert> #agreed FAmSCO will switch to lazy consensus (+5)
14:19:16 <giannisk> #agreed to make decisions based on lazy consensus, timeframe to be determined shortly afterwards
14:19:17 <cwickert> ok, now for the timeframe
14:19:38 <cwickert> I still think it should be 7 days, I cannot imagine anything so ultra-urgent
14:19:52 <giannisk> Most of us agree that 3 days would be too short, so that's not considered.
14:19:56 <cwickert> +1
14:20:01 <giannisk> So it's either 5 days or 7 days.
14:20:52 <cwickert> please all state your preference
14:20:52 <tuanta> I propose we set 7 days in almost normal cases and 5 days for urgent ones
14:20:53 <giannisk> I'm fine with 7 days, although the meetings happen every week so I'm not very sure how that would be very efficient.
14:21:00 <cwickert> 7
14:21:11 <cwickert> we can still shorten it later if it turns out too long
14:21:12 <tuanta> 7
14:21:20 <tuanta> +1 cwickert
14:21:33 <giannisk> cwickert: true, we can change that
14:21:44 <potty> +1 5 days
14:21:59 <cwickert> lbazan: yopur vote please
14:22:07 <giannisk> 7 then, because we need to get things done and we shouldn't hold this even longer. We can change that later.
14:22:33 <giannisk> Provided that 7 days would be proven too long, of course.
14:22:35 * potty is sorry. Got bad connection
14:23:25 <tuanta> ping lbazan
14:24:07 <giannisk> So far we have 3 people for 7d, 1 person for 5d
14:24:54 <potty> Yup
14:25:05 <giannisk> ping lbazan
14:25:49 <lbazan> +1
14:25:51 <lbazan> sorry
14:25:51 * giannisk is tapping his fingers on the desk.
14:25:52 <lbazan> late
14:26:07 <giannisk> lbazan: +1 for which one? 5d or 7d?
14:26:09 <cwickert> lbazan: don't +1, say 5 or 7 days please
14:26:34 <lbazan> +1 to 5
14:26:39 <lbazan> sorry
14:26:39 <cwickert> :(
14:26:48 <cwickert> means we have no majority yet
14:27:02 <giannisk> cwickert: true, it's 3:2
14:27:26 <tuanta> so we need more votes from absent ones
14:27:35 <cwickert> giannisk: IIRC maliga voted for 5 days in trac, so it's actually 3:3
14:27:47 <lbazan> ok
14:27:50 <lbazan> !
14:27:57 <potty> !
14:28:03 <lbazan> I change my vote +1 7
14:28:04 <lbazan> ok
14:28:08 <potty> Changing my vote, to 7days
14:28:23 <giannisk> cwickert: actually he said 7 days
14:28:36 <giannisk> #link https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/390#comment:7
14:28:38 <tuanta> mailga voted for 7
14:28:42 <cwickert> giannisk: +5, -1 and 0 then?
14:28:51 <cwickert> 0 is Sirko, he didn't say anything
14:28:56 <giannisk> cwickert: Exactly
14:28:58 <potty> Yeah
14:28:59 <cwickert> ok
14:29:09 <tuanta> +5, cwickert
14:29:16 <cwickert> #agreed The timeframe for lazy consensus will be 7 days. We can make it shorter later, if necessary (+5, -1, 0)
14:29:16 <tuanta> +6, sorry
14:29:27 <giannisk> Perfect, thanks everyone.
14:29:36 <cwickert> we have a run today ;)
14:29:40 <tuanta> cwickert: lbazan and potty have just changed their votes
14:29:43 <giannisk> Woah, now I feel that we are doing some progress. :)
14:29:52 <tuanta> no "-1"
14:30:07 <cwickert> tuanta: the -1 is giannisk because he preferred 5 days
14:30:16 <cwickert> right, giannisk?
14:30:26 <giannisk> cwickert: That's not correct, I said above that I'm fine with 7d
14:30:32 <cwickert> #undo
14:30:39 <giannisk> cwickert: considering that we should not hold this even longer
14:30:54 <cwickert> #agreed The timeframe for lazy consensus will be 7 days. We can make it shorter later, if necessary (+6, -0, +-0)
14:31:03 <giannisk> and also based on the fact that we can change the timeframe later, if necessary
14:31:04 <cwickert> now it should be correct
14:31:06 <potty> Thank you
14:31:10 <potty> Yes
14:31:15 <cwickert> cool
14:31:22 <giannisk> cwickert: Yes, I missed potty's +1 back there.
14:31:29 <giannisk> Thanks again everyone.
14:31:31 <potty> Lets move on
14:31:34 <potty> :)
14:31:37 <cwickert> giannisk: can you continue with the agenda while I prepare the ticket?
14:31:50 <giannisk> cwickert: certainly
14:32:20 <giannisk> #topic Mentor nominations / cleaning-up inactive mentors
14:32:31 <giannisk> There have been several discussions recently.
14:32:48 <giannisk> Considering whether we should change the nomination process for mentors.
14:33:10 <tuanta> !
14:33:19 <giannisk> We also have a few mentors throughout the regions that are not active anymore, and they are likely not interested in mentoring new ambassadors anymore.
14:33:22 <giannisk> tuanta: please
14:33:35 <tuanta> we should be back to past when Mentors program setup
14:33:51 <tuanta> to understand the context/situation
14:34:03 <giannisk> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors_Join_choose_a_mentor#Regional_Ambassador_Mentors
14:34:14 <giannisk> ^Here is the list of current mentors, both available and unavailable
14:34:58 <tuanta> and remember that Mentor is not a title; it is just for experienced people to support newbies
14:35:08 <tuanta> anyone can do help others as much as they can
14:35:39 <tuanta> they do not need to have that "official" title to do help others
14:35:39 <giannisk> yes, helping and mentoring are different things
14:36:09 <potty> giannisk: indeed
14:36:13 <giannisk> tuanta: But you know, the thing is that some people who hold that "title" are not mentoring others anymore.
14:36:30 <giannisk> And on the other hand we have some very experienced people who we should consider as new mentors.
14:36:32 <tuanta> yes, they are different, but not much
14:36:36 <potty> !
14:36:49 <giannisk> potty: please
14:36:55 <potty> How do we measure inactivity?
14:37:08 <potty> Is there any rule to remove mentor title to someone?
14:37:09 <tuanta> can I finish my comments first?
14:37:22 <potty> Sorry tuanta :(
14:37:38 <tuanta> it's ok, just try to ask for permission :)
14:37:46 <giannisk> tuanta: I though you were done speaking, sorry.
14:37:53 <giannisk> s/though/thought
14:38:44 <tuanta> the biggest difference is a Mentor can approve a new ambassador
14:38:58 <tuanta> most others are the same
14:39:19 <tuanta> for that work, it is not necessary to have a lot of people
14:39:24 <tuanta> eof.
14:40:14 <giannisk> From what I have noticed, some mentors have a passive role. They are sitting there, waiting for people to e-mail them in order to be mentored. This is not necessarily a bad thing.
14:40:25 <giannisk> For me, it would be ideal if more mentors had an active role.
14:40:36 <cwickert> I think this would be  abig change
14:40:36 <giannisk> We need more community building efforts throughout the regions.
14:40:47 <cwickert> and we should discuss it with FAMA first
14:40:59 <giannisk> We need mentors and experienced people to speak at conferences, inspire new potential contributors to join our project.
14:41:00 <tuanta> +1 cwickert
14:41:06 <giannisk> That's what mentorship should also be about.
14:41:39 <giannisk> It could be not just sitting behind a desk, waiting to answer e-mails from people. Which, I say again, is not a bad thing.
14:41:46 <potty> +1 cwickert but we should propose something to FAMA
14:41:49 <giannisk> But I imagine we can do better at that.
14:42:54 <giannisk> I can also reach out to the ambassadors ML with some thoughts.
14:43:17 <cwickert> giannisk: I have a lot of ideas for changing the mentoring process, but in the past, the mentors did not want change
14:43:45 <cwickert> therefor I'm very careful proposing too much change
14:44:06 <giannisk> cwickert: I see
14:44:21 <cwickert> brb
14:45:00 <tuanta> agree giannisk. in fact, AFAIK, almost mentors do that way (active mode) to take candidates on the right way; after those initial setup, candidates should be more active to do their work and contact mentors once they need
14:45:11 <giannisk> We could start a new ticket, proposing some changes. We can all agree on a model and then reach out to fellow mentors and ambassadors, seeking feedback.
14:45:16 <tuanta> remember that they are candidates of Fedora Ambassadors
14:45:35 <tuanta> they should be active to promote the Fedora project
14:46:26 <cwickert> re
14:46:44 <giannisk> tuanta: Agreed. But unfortunately this is not happening all the times.
14:46:54 <tuanta> sorry, cwickert, what do you mean?
14:46:56 <giannisk> tuanta: It differs from mentor to mentor.
14:47:34 <lbazan> I need to withdraw from the meeting
14:47:35 <lbazan> soryr
14:47:37 <lbazan> sorry
14:47:57 <lbazan> I must leave
14:48:00 <tuanta> ok, thank lbazan for your attendance. See you next times :)
14:48:21 <lbazan> tuanta cwickert giannisk potty see ya
14:48:26 <giannisk> Also, I think we have an "issue" in EMEA. Unfortunately, half of the mentors on that list are inactive and have not been mentoring new ambassadors for quite some time.
14:48:32 <giannisk> lbazan: thanks for being here, take care
14:49:27 <giannisk> What do you propose that we should do?
14:50:00 <cwickert> !
14:50:00 <giannisk> I disagree that "mentor" is a permanent title that one should keep forever, regardless if he/she is active and mentoring people or not.
14:50:03 <giannisk> cwickert: please
14:50:31 <cwickert> 1. I suggest we don't change too much now. We have to talk to the mentors/FAMA anyway.
14:50:46 <potty> !
14:50:48 <giannisk> To me, entors should have some "responsibilities" and push efforts in their regions.
14:50:59 <giannisk> s/entors/mentors
14:51:01 <cwickert> can I finish first?
14:51:09 <giannisk> cwickert: sure
14:51:42 <cwickert> 2. We had long discussions about inactive ambassadors. We agreed to not revoke anybody's gropu membership but simply mark them as inactive in FAS
14:52:12 <cwickert> this is an automated process if people have shown no activity such as logging in, sending mails to a list etc.
14:52:26 <cwickert> and I suggest we do something similar with the mentors
14:53:00 <cwickert> we should reach out to them and ask them if they are still available and still interested in mentoring
14:53:13 <cwickert> if they are not available, they are marked as unavailable in the wiki
14:53:35 <cwickert> and if they have no more interest in mentoring at all, they get removed from the group
14:53:49 <cwickert> but I don't want to kick anybody out of the group
14:53:50 <cwickert> eof
14:54:00 <potty> !
14:54:14 <giannisk> potty: go ahead
14:54:19 <potty> I understand that mentors work 'differently'? how do we measure inactivity? Is there a way to make them inactive (as cwickert mention)?
14:54:56 <potty> How do we standarize what mentors do?
14:55:27 <cwickert> potty: we don't have a technical way to figure out if mentors are still active, although it could probably be implemented in fedmsg. But I don't want a definition but simply ask.
14:55:57 <potty> And finally I like cwickert idea. Reach each mentor and ask them about their interest of being mentor. If not interested remove from the mentor group. If do not responde, make them inactive.
14:56:08 <potty> and set a rule to make inactive automatically.
14:56:14 <giannisk> potty: there has never been a standardization
14:56:25 <giannisk> potty: yes, what cwickert said about reaching out to them is fair
14:56:46 <potty> So I think
14:56:47 <cwickert> potty: right, there might even be cases where we HAVE TO mark people inactive, e.g. if they don't do anything and don't respond to our mail
14:57:11 <tuanta> +1 cwickert
14:57:26 <potty> cwickert: thats the point. First a manual inactive marking. After the purge, set an automatic inactive marking.
14:57:39 <cwickert> I think we should start with a 'human' rather than a technical solution first, and that I simply contacting them.
14:57:44 <potty> But first standarize mentor's tasks
14:57:52 <potty> cwickert: +1
14:57:54 <potty> EOF
14:58:00 <giannisk> cwickert:^If that's case the case, we should also considering removing them from the list. As it will be clearly a notice that they're not interested/available to contribute anymore.
14:58:11 <cwickert> potty: standardization is a BIG BIG topic, be careful. ;)
14:58:47 <cwickert> giannisk: we might do this if somebody is inactive on a technical and human level
14:58:51 <tuanta> potty, and for this BIG topic, we must discuss inside mentors group firstly
14:59:05 <cwickert> AFAIR inactive technically means "not logging in to FAS for one year"
14:59:22 <cwickert> and "not writing mails to a list for a year"
14:59:32 <cwickert> so that is clearly inactive :)
14:59:33 <giannisk> I propose we first settle on a few "proposals", write them down and present them to mentors for further discussion/feedback.
14:59:33 <cwickert> AWOL
14:59:41 <cwickert> giannisk: +1
14:59:52 <potty> giannisk: +1
14:59:56 <tuanta> no mails, no IRC, no FAS login, no wiki, etc for a year
15:00:00 <cwickert> add the proposals to the ticket?
15:00:01 <giannisk> I'm willing to open up a ticket on trac and initiate the discussion between us.
15:00:40 <cwickert> giannisk: why not continue in #359?
15:00:40 <potty> Thanks
15:01:10 <giannisk> cwickert: true, we can do that as well
15:01:13 <giannisk> #link https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/359
15:01:40 <cwickert> ok, I'll add my poropsal there then
15:01:43 <giannisk> It was meant to "revoke mentor status", here we're discussing a somewgatdifferent thing, but fine.
15:01:53 <giannisk> s/somewgat/somewhat
15:02:01 <tuanta> everybody, we are running out of time soon
15:02:08 <cwickert> giannisk: we might even end up at revoking, let's see
15:02:50 <giannisk> #info discussion to be continued under #359
15:03:07 <giannisk> There has also been a nomination for me to become a mentor for quite some time now.
15:03:19 <giannisk> Can we please review the ticket?
15:03:28 <giannisk> #link https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/379
15:03:29 <cwickert> ok, but I need to hurry
15:03:36 <giannisk> Some of you have already agreed on that.
15:03:48 <giannisk> With a new FAmSCo, this hasn't been brought up for discussion yet.
15:04:17 <giannisk> I have been doing several efforts in the Balkans area in EMEA, and not being a mentor has been holding me back for quite some time.
15:04:19 * cwickert already agreed as part of the old FAmSCo
15:04:42 <cwickert> giannisk: we already have +4 from current famsco members
15:04:45 <giannisk> Seeing as I have mentored several people, but in the end I handed them over to be approved by other mentors.
15:04:53 <cwickert> or at least +3 if I don't count you
15:05:06 <cwickert> that is mailga, tuanta and me
15:05:23 <giannisk> Yes, that would be +3, not myself included.
15:05:31 <cwickert> giannisk: I suggest we use lazy consensus
15:05:51 <cwickert> if the others don't oppose within a week, you are mentor :)
15:06:04 <cwickert> that's actually the spirit of the guideline
15:06:15 <giannisk> Yes, makes sense.
15:06:17 <giannisk> I will bring it up to the list then.
15:06:17 <cwickert> FAmSCo is only to *confirm* mentors, not vote
15:06:20 * potty got to go
15:06:28 <giannisk> cwickert: Exactly.
15:06:40 * potty is sorry. But client is demanding time.
15:06:46 <cwickert> giannisk: so just set a deadline of 7 days and we are done with this
15:07:03 <potty> Bye giannisk tuanta cwickert. Sorry for leaving earlier.
15:07:09 <giannisk> #action giannisk to bring nomination for giannisk up for discussion
15:07:10 <cwickert> and send this to the list
15:07:18 <cwickert> bye potty
15:07:21 <giannisk> potty: thanks for being here today, take care
15:07:42 <giannisk> Anything else for this topic?
15:07:55 <cwickert> no, but something for leadership
15:08:29 <cwickert> #topic Open Floor
15:08:38 <giannisk> cwickert: please go ahead
15:08:49 <cwickert> #info the ticket for electing the new FamSCo chair is at https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/393
15:08:51 <cwickert> eof
15:09:12 <giannisk> cwickert: you have opened a ticket, great, thanks
15:09:19 <cwickert> np, giannisk
15:09:27 <tuanta> +1 cwickert :)
15:09:32 <cwickert> I'll also send out a reminder to the list
15:10:30 <giannisk> Anything else for today?
15:10:45 <giannisk> Transition to FOSCo is a hot topic, but gnokii is not around.
15:11:42 <cwickert> giannisk: let me respond to his points on the list first
15:11:53 <giannisk> cwickert: certainly
15:12:19 <giannisk> If there isn't anything else in particular for today, I will be ending this meeting in three (3) minutes from now.
15:12:40 <giannisk> Seeing as we have agreed on lazy consensus, it will be a lot easier to make decisions from now own. :)
15:12:54 <cwickert> +1
15:12:56 <cwickert> :)
15:13:05 <tuanta> +1 :)
15:14:15 <giannisk> Thanks and congratulations to all, I feel we have all made some good progress today. :)
15:14:55 <giannisk> See you around.
15:15:03 <cwickert> yes, thanks a lot for pushing everbody!
15:15:11 <cwickert> have fun, bye!
15:15:24 <giannisk> #endmeeting