18:00:01 <mattdm> #startmeeting Council (2016-10-03)
18:00:01 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Oct  3 18:00:01 2016 UTC.  The chair is mattdm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00:01 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
18:00:01 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council_(2016-10-03)'
18:00:03 <mattdm> #meetingname council
18:00:03 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council'
18:00:05 <mattdm> #chair mattdm jkurik jwb cwickert langdon robyduck tatica bexelbie
18:00:05 <zodbot> Current chairs: bexelbie cwickert jkurik jwb langdon mattdm robyduck tatica
18:00:07 <mattdm> #topic Introductions, Welcomes
18:00:16 <mattdm> Good $TIMEOFDAY, everyone!
18:00:21 <bexelbie> .hello bex
18:00:23 <zodbot> bexelbie: bex 'Brian (bex) Exelbierd' <bex@pobox.com>
18:00:33 <mattdm> .hello mattdm
18:00:34 <zodbot> mattdm: mattdm 'Matthew Miller' <mattdm@mattdm.org>
18:00:44 <jkurik> .hello jkurik
18:00:44 <zodbot> jkurik: jkurik 'Jan Kurik' <jkurik@redhat.com>
18:01:52 * mattdm waits for a bit for others to show
18:04:59 <striker> .fas strikerttd
18:05:00 <zodbot> striker: strikerttd 'Striker Leggette' <striker@terranforge.com>
18:06:19 <mattdm> hmmm. it'd be nice to have jwb and langdon....
18:07:18 <mattdm> #topic agenda
18:07:29 <mattdm> okay, so, we seem to be a bit short-staffed today
18:07:38 <mattdm> Agenda items I had proposed are:
18:07:47 <mattdm> 1. Putting Brian on the spot for state of budget :)
18:08:09 <mattdm> 2. Fedora friendliness in support channels (including IRC)
18:08:28 <mattdm> there are a couple of budget request tickets open, too -- these depend on #1, I think.
18:09:03 <mattdm> With only a few of us here, I propose we get a summary of where things are it wrt budget from Brian
18:09:13 <mattdm> (which may be "just starting not ready yet" -- that's fine)
18:09:34 <mattdm> and put the friendliness discussion on hold until we have josh, langdon, and robyduck
18:09:47 <mattdm> (who I absolutely did not mean to exclude -- sorry for not mentioning earlier!)
18:10:03 <bexelbie> #1 is quite short.  The state of hte budget is still a somewhat unknown.  I should receive data today that will help me determine it.  I am at a conference this week and FUDCon next week so I will process it ASAP around those events.  I believe we can afford to approve both of these items however.
18:10:11 <mattdm> anyone have opionions on that?
18:10:16 <mattdm> bexelbie hold on a sec
18:10:21 <bexelbie> sorry :)
18:10:23 <mattdm> #topic budget status summary
18:10:26 <bexelbie> forgot that was in my buffer
18:10:32 <mattdm> now repeat, with an #info :)
18:10:40 <bexelbie> #info #1 is quite short.  The state of hte budget is still a somewhat unknown.  I should receive data today that will help me determine it.  I am at a conference this week and FUDCon next week so I will process it ASAP around those events.  I believe we can afford to approve both of these items however.
18:10:46 <mattdm> bexelbie++ :)
18:11:22 <mattdm> ok. as budget items, they need full consensus; we can call for that here. That means at least 3 +1s and no -1s
18:11:33 <mattdm> within a given timeframe
18:11:54 <mattdm> "generally three to seven days".
18:12:03 <bexelbie> that isn't going to work with #72 ...
18:12:15 <bexelbie> I think
18:12:22 <mattdm> bexelbie because it's more urgent than that?
18:12:34 <bexelbie> FUDCon LATAM is next week - they need to square away details
18:12:38 <bexelbie> this is very very late
18:12:42 <bexelbie> coming to council
18:12:54 <mattdm> yeah :-/
18:13:11 <mattdm> Do we know how spending is in LATAM _overall_? Ahead or behind budget?
18:13:27 <bexelbie> region overall, we don't know
18:13:29 <bexelbie> afaik
18:13:59 <mattdm> That makes this kind of an exercise in blindfolded pin the dollars on the donkey :-/
18:14:22 <bexelbie> regretabbly yes, since the amount is small, I have a feeling we have it in our budget, but I don't have the full data set yet
18:14:51 <mattdm> Okay, so, the options I see are:
18:15:17 <mattdm> a) deny, and ask that requests not be so last minute and the budget in better shape for future requests
18:15:33 <mattdm> b) hold open for discussion for 3 day lazy consensus
18:15:52 <mattdm> b1) since ticket was filed two days, ago, count that as beginning of 3 days for urgency
18:15:56 <bexelbie> !
18:16:29 <mattdm> c) approve based on general sense, and make same request as a) for the future
18:16:32 <mattdm> bexelbie go
18:16:50 * jwb reads scroll back
18:16:55 <mattdm> (although I think you can just talk without ! formality given how few we have in the channel right now)
18:16:58 <mattdm> oh hi jwb!
18:17:32 <jwb> -1 on the approval
18:17:44 <bexelbie> I like c the best.  Some background - they were originally far more over budget and have gone through a significant cost cutting exercise.  There has been a history of this event getting last minute funding (apparently) and the idea that they couldn't was shocking.  As we are pushing a new budget model, I think we need to protect events as much as possible but also make it clear that budgeting is real.
18:18:26 <mattdm> bexelbie: *nod*
18:18:41 <mattdm> jwb: Reasoning?
18:19:17 <jwb> Because it's irresponsible and we literally have no idea if we have budget for it
18:19:53 <jwb> Just because we have a bad precedent doesn't mean we need to continue it
18:20:12 <mattdm> "We literally have no idea" definitely concerns me too.
18:20:22 <mattdm> bexelbie: You said you are expecting some data today?
18:20:44 <bexelbie> yes, I am expecting data today
18:20:53 <langdon> .hello langdon
18:20:54 <zodbot> langdon: langdon 'Langdon White' <langdon@fishjump.com>
18:20:57 <langdon> sorry im late
18:20:58 <bexelbie> it will not give me a full picture yet though there is still stuff to marry to make it complete
18:21:03 * langdon reads scrollback
18:21:11 <jkurik> on the other hand, I agree with the statement bexelbie made: we are pushing a new budget model, and we need to protect events as much as possible
18:21:11 <mattdm> Will it be enough to help us make an informed decision here?
18:21:32 <jwb> What is the shortfall for?
18:21:41 <bexelbie> about $600
18:21:58 <bexelbie> I was going to ask that we increase the approval from the $540ish asked for to $600
18:22:19 <jwb> Yes but for what?
18:23:05 <bexelbie> jwb, t-shirts is the bulk of it iirc
18:23:12 <mattdm> jwb: there is a spreadsheet in the ticket. the total comes to over $10k.
18:23:14 * bexelbie looks at the attached spreadsheet
18:23:44 <mattdm> #link https://fedorahosted.org/council/attachment/ticket/72/budget_for_fudcon_puno.pdf
18:23:46 <mattdm> ftr.
18:24:10 <mattdm> The large bulk is airfare.
18:24:18 <bexelbie> they were originally about $3000 over before cost cutting
18:24:36 <mattdm> $7739.65 out of $10,534.88.
18:25:24 <bexelbie> flights are partially inflated by the agency costs - which were not in their original budget
18:25:30 <langdon> so.. im a bit lost.. we approved 7.2k already? and now they want ~500 more?
18:25:38 <bexelbie> something they didn't have insight into when they were doing their initial calculations
18:25:49 <mattdm> That's unlikely to be very flexible. The rest looks pretty bare-bones.
18:25:56 <mattdm> langdon: we approved $10k overall budget
18:26:07 * langdon mutters, in the future, can they please include the spreadsheet..
18:26:24 <bexelbie> I can share a google doc link if that is easier
18:27:22 <langdon> so .. this is where i am confused.. do they need 2k? as it says in the pdf? or did they cut to 7.2k and now they want 7.8k?
18:27:35 <jwb> Why do they need 100 t shirts for 22 people?
18:27:53 <langdon> and 1k booklets?
18:28:06 <bexelbie> I can't speak to books and t-shirt counts
18:28:10 <mattdm> langdon: are you looking at a different PDF?
18:28:12 <bexelbie> The totla budget is 12.2K
18:28:20 <langdon> the one linked in the ticket
18:28:20 <bexelbie> they have sponsors for part and 10K from Fedora
18:28:32 <jwb> Cut the shirts and they don't need extra funds
18:28:34 <bexelbie> they are over budget by $540 that is neither sponsored by external parties or included in the Fedora 10K
18:29:01 <jwb> The alternative is to cut lunch.  That seems less reasonable
18:29:05 <langdon> bexelbie, ill tell ya.. this spreadsheet/pdf does not make that clear *at all*
18:29:24 <bexelbie> langdon, I only know because I was in the long conversation that got us this spreadsheet
18:29:42 <langdon> well.. maybe.. i am now getting "paid by" .. was thinkng that was vendor
18:30:03 <bexelbie> langdon, yes, that is the party doing the paying (sponsor)
18:30:34 <mattdm> bexelbie: Is the expected attendance 22 in total?
18:30:56 <bexelbie> mattdm, If it is I am going to be shocked
18:31:02 <bexelbie> my understanding is 22 is the total funded travel number
18:31:16 <bexelbie> but I have not discussed that component with the event owner
18:31:24 <langdon> hence 100 t-shirts vs 22 attendees?
18:31:30 <mattdm> So, 22 funded for travel and meals, but more attendees expected?
18:31:38 <bexelbie> this is my understanding
18:31:48 <bexelbie> It is supposed to be a FUDCon, not a FAD, afaik
18:31:55 <jwb> Take this question in mind.. who are we going to take this$500 dollars from?
18:32:00 <mattdm> bexelbie: exactly my thinking
18:32:11 * langdon also looks forward to another $200 request to cover "waiting for sponsor"
18:32:23 <jwb> Because last I remembered, we're tapped
18:32:28 <bexelbie> jwb, my concerns as well ... I am hoping but do not have data to validate, that we have underspent that so far
18:32:36 <mattdm> bexelbie: do you think that between your data and the latam ambassadors we could have more information in a couple of days?
18:32:41 <bexelbie> jwb, I believe we were encumbered, but not necessarily tapped
18:32:57 <bexelbie> mattdm, honestly not sure that is going to be possible, but I can try
18:33:04 * langdon notes bexelbie could just eat something from his pack and recover faster
18:33:05 <bexelbie> langdon, afaik there will be no additional requests
18:33:08 <mattdm> because if latam is $500 under-budget in spending... that makes this pretty reasonable.
18:33:27 <bexelbie> in my coaching I tried to make it very very clear that they only get one chance at the well and this is already number 2 ... there is no number 3
18:33:28 <langdon> bexelbie, so if they don't find a sponsor, someone is going to take the $200 hit?
18:33:41 <bexelbie> langdon, I believe those items will be cancelled in that case
18:33:43 <bexelbie> aiui
18:34:08 <bexelbie> mattdm, I understanding tieing it to the region's spend, however the FUDCon was funded by the council not the region
18:34:31 <bexelbie> so while I believe council should harvest underspend back from budgets, I don't know that we can really tie it fully to that budget except conceptually
18:34:51 <mattdm> bexelbie: okay, that's fair... but still leaves us in the dark.
18:35:02 <bexelbie> I've got entire bags of dark over here :)
18:35:06 <jwb> I don't think we can make a decision today without having data
18:35:18 <jwb> And I'm still -1
18:35:27 <mattdm> jwb: What data do you need to change that to a 0 or +?
18:35:33 * langdon also wonders why they canceled the cheaper shirts and kept the more expensive ones :/
18:35:47 <jwb> Answers to my questions...
18:36:12 <mattdm> jwb: I was trying to get those questions in concise form :)
18:36:13 <bexelbie> given the time constraints, can we give them specific questions to answer?
18:36:16 <mattdm> for the record and all.
18:36:17 <langdon> and if they have hit up their sponsors again
18:36:22 <mattdm> yeah, that. :)
18:36:37 <jflory7> Could denote key questions for the logs with #help
18:36:38 <bexelbie> I'll work on the fedobudget side
18:36:46 <mattdm> jflory7++
18:36:52 <mattdm> bexelbie: thanks!
18:36:58 <bexelbie> #help what is the expected attendance?
18:37:09 <bexelbie> #help Why are you printing 1000 books and only 100 t-shirts?
18:37:23 <bexelbie> #help Why did you cancel the cheaper t-shirts and keep the expensive ones?
18:37:31 <bexelbie> #help Have you looked for any additional sponsors?
18:37:36 <langdon> why did you cancel the cheaper shirts? ; how about 50% of the shirts?
18:37:44 <bexelbie> #help What is going to happen with the two "waiting for sponsor items"?
18:38:22 <langdon> i would also explicitly recommend hitting up the existing sponsors for ~100 each.. and explain the shortfall to them too
18:38:46 <jwb> Suggest they reach out to regions to "borrow" the budget
18:38:57 <langdon> jwb, good one
18:39:51 <bexelbie> #help have you contacted the LATAM ambassador group for funding?
18:40:05 <bexelbie> #help Can you get additional funding from existing sponsors?
18:40:09 <langdon> bexelbie, i think we are expecting you to add them to make sure no "asked and answered"
18:40:24 <bexelbie> langdon, ?
18:40:39 <mattdm> #info Possibly also check with other regional ambassadors to see if there is underspend in those regions which could be reallocated.
18:40:41 <langdon> bexelbie, i was laggy.. was explaining why jwb and i weren't doing #help
18:40:58 <langdon> mattdm, #help? or #info?
18:41:12 <mattdm> langdon: that one was an info :)
18:41:20 <mattdm> "just an idea!"
18:41:28 <langdon> ack
18:41:55 <bexelbie> itamarjp just told me via Telegram they had 1000+ attendees last year
18:42:15 <langdon> umm wow..
18:42:30 <mattdm> Is that expected again?
18:42:40 <bexelbie> that was last fudcon peru I am now being told
18:42:49 <mattdm> Because 10k for 22 people and 10k for 1000+ are very different :)
18:43:15 <langdon> mattdm++
18:43:15 <zodbot> langdon: Karma for mattdm changed to 5 (for the f24 release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
18:43:27 <jflory7> mattdm++
18:43:45 <mattdm> Given that, and the effort to keep the budget trim, I'm inclined to approve *if* we know the budget is available.
18:43:59 <jwb> Cut lunch.  Why do 22 people get funded lunch but 978 don't?
18:44:21 <jwb> That's $400 saved
18:44:40 <bexelbie> the 1000 was in 2013 in Cucos Peru apparently
18:45:07 <bexelbie> jwb, that is an idea ...
18:45:11 <langdon> that is a bunch more than last year
18:45:20 <langdon> like more than a year ago
18:45:41 <bexelbie> langdon, I am passing along data as I get it :)
18:45:42 <jflory7> #idea? :)
18:46:00 <jwb> All I'm hearing here is anecdotes.  Data is required
18:46:09 <langdon> jwb, +100
18:46:27 <langdon> #help attendees for the last several latam fudcons
18:46:34 <langdon> #undo
18:46:34 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: HELP by langdon at 18:46:27 : attendees for the last several latam fudcons
18:46:40 <langdon> #help attendee counts for the last several latam fudcons
18:47:00 <jwb> Sorry to take a hard line on this.  I want this to be successful, but not at the expense of some other group we have to take from
18:47:01 <bexelbie> #info Idea: cut the funded lunches for 22 attendees
18:47:08 <bexelbie> jwb, agreed
18:47:36 <langdon> however, i would lean towards keeping t-shirts if possible.. as that is how we get some "after event" marketing
18:48:00 <mattdm> jwb In fact, I'm willing to make that a general council statement unless anyone _disagrees_
18:48:26 <langdon> so...
18:48:28 <mattdm> #info Council wants this to be successful, but not at the expense of some other group we have to take from.
18:48:36 <langdon> ohh
18:48:42 <langdon> i thought you meant killing lunches
18:48:52 <langdon> ill share my thought any way
18:48:54 <mattdm> maybe lunch too :)
18:49:33 <bexelbie> #help How are the t-shirts being distributed?  What earns someone a t-shirt? Why do only 10% get them?
18:49:43 <langdon> my struggle with the lunches is .. with many of these events the economy differences between countries is so significant that those 22 people may have a serious hardship on affording food in the host country.. so.. i am not sure "killing lunch" is a viable option
18:50:06 <langdon> e.g. an event in the US for someone from mexico
18:50:45 <bexelbie> langdon, I agree there too - I don't know the complete situation though
18:50:49 <langdon> so.. swag, yes.. food/transport i am less comfortable with.. however, 22->18 might make sense
18:51:15 <bexelbie> 22->18?
18:51:20 <langdon> funded people
18:51:38 <langdon> like 4 people stay at home.. vs 22 people have a rough trip
18:51:59 <langdon> although this late in the game... that is probably a non-starter
18:52:02 * mattdm looks at clock
18:52:06 <jwb> Flights are booked
18:52:07 <bexelbie> plane tickets are bought, afaik
18:52:21 <langdon> right, figured
18:52:49 * langdon misses the days when *most* flights were refundable
18:52:53 * langdon also dates himself
18:53:34 <bexelbie> I strongly believe that we have the money - the issue seems to be to be one of whether this is the hard line we are drawing and setting the full example or if we want to draw a soft line as we get the budget process back on track and help reorient people to the new transparent but real budget
18:54:42 <langdon> i think the problem is we are not in the position to say because we don't *know* if we have the money
18:55:18 <langdon> however, I am inclined to "soft" or "not quite hard" is my preference really.. e.g. we cover it, but you cut something material as well
18:55:45 <bexelbie> They have cut $2000+ iirc, but it happened before this request
18:55:50 <mattdm> I don't want to be hard-tempered steel line, necessarily, but the thing is... we don't have any updates on budget.fedoraproject.org
18:56:17 <mattdm> and no updates in https://pagure.io/fedora-budget/commits/master
18:56:25 <langdon> bexelbie, well.. did they cut 2k? or find 2k in sponsorship?
18:56:27 <mattdm> maybe there *is* data being tracked that I'm just not aware of.
18:56:55 <bexelbie> langdon, they really did cut
18:56:57 <mattdm> I know that a lot of this is chaos due to decause leaving with short notice, though, and I don't want to blame that all on the ambassadors/regions
18:57:00 <bexelbie> They had a 15K+ budget
18:57:09 <bexelbie> that is in their wiki page ...
18:57:19 <bexelbie> now I don't know how "hard" the cuts were to make
18:57:22 <mattdm> On the other hand, it can't be all on (now) bexelbie...
18:57:23 <langdon> bexelbie, ok.. as noted before, this spreadsheet does not provide all the deets :) i wasn't accusing or anything.. just checking ;)
18:57:36 <bexelbie> langdon, not taking it the wrong way at all
18:57:38 * mattdm looks more significantly at clock.
18:57:41 <langdon> mattdm, pshaw.. why not!?
18:57:44 <bexelbie> I have more data only because I was in the 4 hour meeting that got us this far
18:58:09 <bexelbie> mattdm, I see my role as trying to be a budget mentor from now on :)
18:58:16 * langdon much prefers to come to difficult conclusions and hand off implementation to a messenger who may or may not be killed ;)
18:58:19 <jflory7> langdon: Starting strong from day 1 ;)
18:58:36 <mattdm> bexelbie+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
18:58:49 <langdon> yay spreadsheets! ;)
18:59:17 <jwb> Need to go
18:59:20 <langdon> jwb, feeling on hard/soft line?
18:59:30 <langdon> you have like 30s :)
19:00:15 <mattdm> Does anyone not-me want to volunteer to update the ticket with a summary of this discussion?
19:00:21 <mattdm> Or we could just link to the minutes :)
19:00:55 <bexelbie> I'll upate hte ticket tomorrow
19:00:55 <langdon> mattdm, i would volley.. but i am concerned there is not enough conclusion
19:00:59 <bexelbie> if noe one does it today
19:01:02 <mattdm> I'll just link to the minutes for now
19:01:03 <langdon> unless you want the "#helps"?
19:01:07 <mattdm> thanks bexelbie
19:01:13 <mattdm> the minutes will have the helps
19:01:23 <bexelbie> but I have to go to dinner and be up at 6am local time for Linuxcon so it will probably be midday
19:01:38 <langdon> like i said.. i think that may be best.. as in .. there aren't really and conclusions
19:01:51 <langdon> *any conclusions
19:01:53 <bexelbie> but I will tell to read the minutes now via Telegram
19:01:53 <mattdm> ok.
19:02:12 <mattdm> FTR this same "we are in the dark" affects the other budget request ticket, too.
19:03:24 <bexelbie> mattdm, I agree, but also believe we have the money to do it
19:04:06 <mattdm> bexelbie: good. And you're in the best position for your feelings wrt our money supply to be accurate :)
19:04:24 <mattdm> Let's try and get some numbers as soon as possible.
19:04:36 <jzb> doesn't this event happen next week?
19:04:44 <jzb> e.g., wouldn't a decision be needed sooner?
19:04:56 <mattdm> jzb: sooner than "possible"?
19:05:49 <jzb> mattdm: if bex has numbers later today will the decision be made before next Monday?
19:06:47 <mattdm> It can be, as long as josh is satisfied enough to remove his -1
19:07:19 <mattdm> I'm not sure if cwickert has officially resigned yet.
19:07:28 <langdon> i woudl also like us to have a general consensus on the "soft vs hard line" question
19:07:29 <mattdm> and we don't have robyduck's vote
19:07:54 <mattdm> langdon: yeah. can you start a mailing list thread on that?
19:08:22 <langdon> mattdm, :P
19:08:29 <mattdm> langdon: <3
19:08:53 <mattdm> also, I think tatica probably gets a binding vote on this, but I am going to assume that she is +1
19:09:58 <mattdm> in any case, jwb is gone, I have some urgent things, and bexelbie has dinner.
19:10:04 <mattdm> let's take this to the ticket and list!
19:10:09 <mattdm> #endmeeting