11:34:39 <pjp> #startmeeting APAC Ambassador's bi-weekly meeting 05 Apr 2018
11:34:40 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Apr  5 11:34:39 2018 UTC.  The chair is pjp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
11:34:40 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
11:34:40 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'apac_ambassador's_bi-weekly_meeting_05_apr_2018'
11:34:40 <Amita> Sure
11:34:48 <pjp> #meetingname apac
11:34:48 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'apac'
11:34:56 <pjp> #topic Roll Call
11:35:04 <Amita> .hello amsharma
11:35:04 <zodbot> Amita: [hellomynameis amsharma]
11:35:17 <pjp> .hello pjp
11:35:18 <zodbot> pjp: [hellomynameis pjp]
11:36:05 <bexelbie> .hello bex
11:36:05 <zodbot> bexelbie: [hellomynameis bex]
11:36:20 * bexelbie wonders if ibus can somehow be used to get emoji without a gui
11:36:22 <pravins> .hello pravins
11:36:22 <zodbot> pravins: [hellomynameis pravins]
11:37:21 <pravins> bexelbie: we had that option earlier in F26, control+shift+e  "emoji name" and done. but now things changed. i think Gnome is planning something on that side.
11:38:16 <pjp> We start with the tickets?
11:38:49 <pravins> yes
11:39:53 <pjp> There are two major ones, OSCAL and APAC Treasurer role
11:40:00 <pjp> Let's start with OSCAL one
11:40:02 <pjp> #topic Funding request for OSCAL -> https://pagure.io/ambassadors-apac/issue/294
11:40:12 <pjp> #link https://pagure.io/ambassadors-apac/issue/294
11:41:32 <pjp> I've already commented on the ticket, IMO requested budget is quite on higher side, we can consider partial support
11:42:39 <pravins> From ticket, i see majority members are opposing.
11:43:15 <bexelbie> If it helps, for budget guidance, assume that APAC will have access to similar funds as last year but is currently spend restricted to 25% of the total allocation as we don't have our final RH budget yet.  Also, don't forget that Mindshare may change things as the year goes by, but that shouldn't block us from doing things important to APAC.
11:43:16 <pravins> pjp: can you point me to budget allocation Wiki page?
11:43:33 <bexelbie> There is no budget wiki anymore pravins
11:43:40 <bexelbie> you can see the budget at budget.fedoraproject.org/
11:43:48 <bexelbie> the FY19 budget is not yet approved, so there is no funding in that
11:43:55 <bexelbie> you can see how the FY18 money was spent though
11:44:00 <pravins> then, on what basis we can say, that we are higher on budget side.
11:44:32 <pjp> pravins: -> https://budget.fedoraproject.org/budget/FY19/apac.html
11:44:43 <pjp> pravins: allocation wiki?
11:45:14 <bexelbie> pravins, I believe the "high side" comments represent one of two things:
11:45:24 <bexelbie> a) A reflection on this amount versus last year's numbers: https://budget.fedoraproject.org/budget/FY18/apac.html
11:45:34 <bexelbie> b) the interpretation of people of the total cost relative to their local economy
11:46:15 <bexelbie> I am not endorsing either as right or wrong
11:46:29 <bexelbie> I do think "b" represents thinking that can accidentally block good ideas
11:46:42 <pravins> pjp: i mean, have we done any allocation of budget for this FY.
11:46:46 <pjp> bexelbie: that is, considering last year's budget of USD 5k/-, it's almost quarter of that. I'd be wary of allocating that mush early in the year.
11:46:50 <bexelbie> I think the question we need to ask is, is sending this a good thing for APAC.  If so, maybe we do it, if not let's not do it
11:47:28 <pjp> pravins: No, we haven't done allocation or budget planning for upcoming events through FY19
11:47:39 <bexelbie> pjp, I respect that too.  I'd point at both EMEA and LATAM as groups which got to the end of the year and had done good things and were running low on funds.  Both groups went to the council and said "we want to do these other good things too, can we get some more $$" and they got approved
11:48:06 <pravins> pjp: i think we should do it before entertaining on the fly tickets for funding request.
11:48:13 <bexelbie> I am not sure that central front-loaded planning is a successful model for regions.  Very few regions can really predict what they are going to do well and then that plan is used as a reason to not do things people come up with mid-year
11:49:15 <bexelbie> I strongly encourage all of APAC to consider that as a project, contributor attention is our most constrained and precious resource.  If we burn that up doing budget planning we don't have the attention need to actually do the impactful events that grow us, in this case, in APAC
11:49:38 <pjp> True, also considering last year's spend of < 2k/- USD, IMO partial support would be prudent,
11:50:19 <bexelbie> While I do not believe that we have unlimited money, if we make good decision and understand why we did them, we can generally find funds to make more good decisions
11:50:48 <pravins> As far as i think supporting APAC events will be good not EMEA.
11:51:51 <pravins> devconf.in is coming up, we can showcase good Fedora show in it. If some other APAC ambassador wants to fly for devconf.in let him fly and we can have good meetup.
11:52:36 <pjp> Yes, we'll do that too.
11:52:40 <pravins> even, i am not sure are other people aware regarding availability of fund at Fedora APAC?
11:53:54 <pjp> IMO, it can be both ways, to help Fedora contributors to come to APAC and also help local contributors to attend other events.
11:54:15 <pjp> Of course, all subject to available budget numbers.
11:54:55 <bexelbie> At the council/mindshare level I am hearing a lot of conversation about the value of local efforts.  I hope APAC will consider that.
11:55:23 <bexelbie> Again, I strongly encourage this decision to start with "value for Fedora and APAC" and then worry about numbers.  Numbers are not the blocker here
11:55:24 <pjp> bexelbie: value of local efforts towards building local community ?
11:56:01 <pravins> to me, this ticket does not create any value for APAC, so still on same opinion.
11:56:45 <bexelbie> pjp, the value of any activity for Fedora and APAC
11:56:56 <bexelbie> with the thought that local events tend to be how communities get started
11:57:41 <pjp> Hmmn,
11:58:18 * bexelbie notices the time.  I hate to be this way, but I'd like to make sure we take action on https://pagure.io/ambassadors-apac/issue/276 so it unblocks the card holder and treasurer
11:59:17 <pravins> pjp: if we have left-over budget we can try to fund few attendees for devconf.cz, since devconf.cz does not provide any travel funding. But at this moments, lets reserve fund to support APAC activities and conferences.
12:00:23 <pjp> Hmmn, I guess we are in a dead lock situation. If we only focus on the direct local impact of doing something, I guess it offer very narrow scope for budget expenditure.
12:00:39 <bexelbie> pjp don't interpret anything as an absolute or a rule
12:00:47 <bexelbie> as a group, this group needs to do what they think is best
12:00:56 <bexelbie> that may mean saying yes or no to things for different reasons
12:01:06 <pjp> Yes, I think we need to define how we evaluate that best,
12:01:16 <pjp> True
12:01:20 <bexelbie> one way to do that is to have a framework conversation
12:01:30 <bexelbie> the other is to "wing it" and start making decisions and see what develops over time
12:01:42 <bexelbie> a framework conversation is going to block all activity until the framework is complete
12:01:51 <pjp> True
12:01:55 <bexelbie> I'd like to see APAC doing things
12:02:05 <pjp> Plus it'll need participation from all regions across APAC
12:02:07 <bexelbie> even failed experiments are ok if we though they would work and had a reason to believe in them
12:02:25 <bexelbie> doing the same failed experiment over and over is bad though
12:02:45 * sumantro is here
12:02:56 <Amita> I have just 2 things to say..
12:03:56 <Amita> 1. Budget - We keep using lesser budget everyyear in APAC, and when we say we should use this budget for local things, we are not really planned for anything and we are blocking ourselves from doing global stuff in Fedora
12:05:19 <Amita> 2. Value for Fedora and APAC - There are good number of activities planned during the visit, which I think are valuable. APAC supported in past the travel only for speaking and in this ticket , there are more activities more than just speaking
12:05:38 <Amita> I also agree with the point that, whole budget should not be given from APAC
12:05:50 <Amita> partial funding seems reasonable to me
12:05:55 <Amita> thanks
12:05:57 <Amita> <EOF>
12:06:17 <pravins> Amita: thanks for putting these points. 👍
12:06:24 <Amita> one more thing--
12:06:32 <Amita> I did FWD in Banglore last year
12:06:35 <pravins> for point <1> can we spend next meeting on budget planning for APAC?
12:06:43 <Amita> and I used diversity budget for that
12:07:08 <Amita> so it really should not matter too much, from which bucket the budget is going, if something good is happening
12:07:10 <pjp> pravins: Budget planning can't happen in an hour, plus needs participation from other regions.
12:07:42 <pravins> pjp: that is why i am saying, next meeting which is going to happen after 14 days. Lets send email on list. Interested members will definitely join.
12:07:46 <Amita> Infact for Pune FWD too , I used diversity budget :)
12:07:53 <bexelbie> pjp budget planning only needs other regions when it is cross-regional.  Under the system we have now, APAC has a separate budget and doesn't need consent from other regions
12:08:29 <Amita> and this ticket is time critical, it does not make too much sense to get budget after OSCAL :P
12:08:29 <sumantro> what pjp meant was other countries from apac
12:08:31 <pjp> bexelbie: I mean participation of ambassadors from other APAC regions, Singapore, SriLanka, etc.
12:09:29 * Amita needs to learn how pravins does these emoji magic  👍
12:09:36 <pjp> We are running short on time, 20 min to go
12:10:15 <sumantro> whats up with the status of swags for coming release parties pjp pravins Amita
12:10:16 <pravins> Amita: i will let you know.. :)
12:10:18 <Amita> Can we take a vote for partial funding?
12:10:31 <pravins> sumantro: good point, our last Fedora meetup was without Swag :(
12:10:41 <Amita> sumantro,  https://pagure.io/ambassadors-apac/issue/294  is the current topic
12:10:56 <pjp> In the absence of yearly planning, if we are to go with partial funding, how much are we okay with?
12:10:57 <sumantro> Amita, sorry lets carry on this one :)
12:10:57 <pravins> IMHO many people are not present in meeting today and already given votes on ticket, so lets consider it.
12:11:16 <paragan> my vote does not count here but based on the discussion happened in ticket I am changing my thinking  from partial to no budget support to be given for this ticket.
12:12:09 <pjp> Hmmn, that's 2 -ve,
12:12:18 <sumantro> I am +1 on the partial funding as mentioned
12:12:23 <pjp> sumantro: tnzchok who else here?
12:12:51 <pravins> do we have any quorum :)
12:13:57 <sumantro> vipul too voted for +1 i see in the ticket
12:13:57 * pravins strongly feels, lets try to do tentative budget planning before allocating any on-the-fly tickets. Specifically where majority not agrees.
12:14:05 <tnzchok> I am also on the partial funding, but can someone explain me the part i missed in  a private chat ?
12:14:15 <tnzchok> pjp?
12:14:50 <pravins> 16mins to go.
12:14:50 <pjp> tnzchok: discussing funding request -> https://pagure.io/ambassadors-apac/issue/294
12:14:54 <bexelbie> pravins, if you feel strongly about that, will you write a budget plan people can edit?  This way we get to consensus faster than everyone staring at a blank page?
12:15:13 <pjp> pravins: looks like 4 +ve for partial funding, 2 -ve
12:15:31 <bexelbie> Most regions use a model that says that they vote for things based on their merits and don't try to guess, for example, how many release parties will happen
12:15:42 <bexelbie> In fact, I think every region uses that model
12:16:47 <pjp> Yes,
12:16:58 <pravins> bexelbie: at least i can help to organize budget planning meeting. Lets see how many regions and members interested and how many idea pops-up.
12:17:32 <pjp> pravins: I'd suggest, let's try email, meeting people don't show-up, plus emails stay in the archives
12:17:48 <Amita> that seems long term planning.. it should not block the decision
12:17:51 <pravins> pjp: that is good idea.
12:17:59 <bexelbie> pravins, what is the concern you ahve with voting on ideas based on their merit?  What is solved by going through a big planning process?
12:18:04 <paragan> pjp, My thinking is more the budget we use for non local activities, more will be chance to get less allocated budget every upcoming year. I am not sure what decides how much budget a region should get. But if this started happening then there are many conferences across the world and APAC people start using budget only to travel
12:18:08 <bexelbie> in software this is the waterfall vs agile debate
12:18:12 <paragan> pjp, Do you want that to happen in APAC?
12:18:38 <paragan> pjp, if yes then lets utilize all the budget in first quarter only
12:18:45 <pravins> bexelbie: only thing, i feel is getting out of budget for devconf.cz kind events :)
12:19:06 <bexelbie> pravins, then bring that up when those propsoals come up .. but dont' block everything over that
12:19:14 <pjp> paragan: I'd say, let's try it, we didn't spend all the budget last year, that also can reduce total budget
12:19:24 <paragan> pjp, again you failed
12:19:31 <pjp> paragan: ?
12:19:32 <bexelbie> based on the last two years, APAC can't find ways to spend it's money.  I am very not worried about this region running out of money.  I am way more concerned that it doesn't do much activity
12:19:32 <sumantro> pravins, events are events big or small,FAD gets done a way more work than devconf.cz might now
12:19:33 <paragan> you are not even thinking to build local communities
12:19:40 <paragan> just want to use budget for travel
12:19:45 <pravins> bexelbie: yeah, you mentioned just, if APAC comes to council with good ideas. Council can help with it. So that concerns solves.
12:20:22 <pravins> sumantro: indeed agreed, small FAD brings more values.
12:20:23 <pjp> paragan: Not true, I'm not against helping with travel,
12:20:31 <paragan> sumantro, point is valid. We even not discussed swags for local events
12:20:40 <paragan> pjp, I don't see any action from you
12:21:01 <pjp> paragan: action for?
12:21:12 <paragan> pjp, producing the swags
12:21:18 <paragan> for local events
12:21:27 <bexelbie> Can we please not ahve a swag conversation before resolving this ticket
12:21:40 <pjp> paragan: I've done that in the past, and trust me it did not take much, especially now that we are not producing DVDs.
12:21:44 <paragan> its discussion about how budget should get used in upcoming year
12:21:46 <bexelbie> Swag is a super solveable problem.  Let's consider not spending our attention and time on it now
12:22:01 <Amita> 10 mins left
12:22:04 <pjp> True
12:22:05 <Amita> 1 hr we invested
12:22:11 <Amita> can we please solve on eticket
12:22:16 <Amita> one*
12:22:21 <Amita> let's just vote
12:22:30 <Amita> and close the ticket with decision
12:22:34 <Amita> please
12:22:38 <sumantro> the last vote count was +4 and -2 .. anyone else?
12:23:12 <paragan> well guys just voting +1 is not important here
12:23:20 <pjp> sumantro: that's +4 for partial, how much is that number?
12:23:38 <Amita> pjp, the total number mentioned in ticket divide by 2
12:23:44 <pravins> We do not have any quorum. decided. Feel free to take decision. I am happy bexelbie is here :)
12:23:56 <sumantro> if partial is like 50% .. 4 should be 200% :P
12:24:03 <Amita> lol
12:24:11 <pravins> ha ha, sumantro :)
12:24:38 <bexelbie> pravins, the definition of quorum is a larger concern.  I am not sure we can tell if we have consensus or not.  I suggest we assume we do until we get evidence to the contrary
12:24:45 <bexelbie> by your count sumantro 6 people voted
12:24:50 <bexelbie> that's more than NA requires on a ticket
12:24:56 <bexelbie> as a way of gauging the number
12:25:00 <bexelbie> not as a judgement on NA
12:25:02 <pravins> make 367464
12:25:04 <pravins> 039655
12:25:13 <bexelbie> 612548 ?
12:25:14 <pravins> make sense to me
12:25:14 <bexelbie> :P
12:25:19 <pjp> I feel okay upto 400/- USD.
12:25:33 <pravins> my kid, near my laptop ;)
12:25:33 <sumantro> what is partial to you Amita ? please state an amount?
12:25:38 <bexelbie> actually to correct, NA requires 5 +1s.  I'd argue 6 voters in APAC is quite a bit
12:25:51 <Amita> 1000 USD is total as of today
12:25:57 <Amita> 500USD is 50%
12:26:23 <Amita> so total of 500USD
12:26:24 <tnzchok> i think 500USD is good
12:26:32 <sumantro> pjp is okay with 400 and I am okay will 500 too.. anyone else?
12:26:43 <Amita> pravins, cute..mine is all the time :)
12:27:01 <pravins> ohh, lucky Amita :)
12:27:16 <Amita> hehe
12:27:22 <pravins> 3 min, to go.
12:27:58 <Amita> pravins, you can think again... as bexelbie said, council will help if we have something come up in future for APAC
12:28:31 <Amita> so don't worry, we have events coming up..started with OM's help
12:28:32 <bexelbie> I am not making promises of council help, I am telling you how council has voted in the past
12:28:35 <Amita> we will do good
12:28:41 <bexelbie> OM ?
12:28:55 <Amita> bexelbie, a guy here in Pune
12:29:00 <bexelbie> ahh
12:29:12 <tnzchok> pjp i think you can do 500 :P
12:29:13 <Amita> anyways.. what is the decision :)
12:29:26 <Amita> pjp, yeah please.. that will help
12:29:30 <pjp> tnzchok: Okay,
12:29:32 <pravins> OM - ompragash, new active person at Pune for Fedora.
12:29:36 <Amita> yeah
12:30:01 <sumantro> pravins, i18n right?
12:30:07 <pjp> 1 min to go...
12:30:28 <pjp> Okay, let's go with 500/- USD for now then.
12:30:29 <tnzchok> bex and pravin voted?
12:30:30 <sumantro> so 500 is it? Also, when is swag coming to the picture?
12:30:50 <pjp> sumantro: You mentioned Uday was going do that?
12:30:57 <pravins> tnzchok: i am already -1.
12:31:02 <paragan> Congratulations guys, you started a new trend. Let's market this thing that Since today APAC region started awarding 50% abroad travel. Just get your talk selected. PJP is there to help us all ;-)
12:31:05 * bexelbie isn't voting here both because I am the FCAIC and representing budget thought and because while I am an ambassador I am technically and EMEA ambassador :)
12:31:34 <pjp> paragan: Heh, we've done that in the past too. Plus it's subject to availability.
12:31:48 <paragan> pjp, afai remember only for Flock
12:31:53 <Amita> paragan, really.. ??
12:31:57 <sumantro> well, seems like Uday didnt take much action
12:31:58 <Amita> wow
12:32:07 <paragan> Amita, yes :)
12:32:15 <bexelbie> paragan, that is an inappropriate exaggeration in my opinion
12:32:31 <paragan> bexelbie, sorry
12:32:34 <Amita> paragan, too bold
12:33:20 <paragan> but whats wrong there? If you are a speaker you need budget can't you people help with budget funding for travel?
12:33:30 <paragan> you just did that
12:33:42 <pjp> Are we taking next one? Already past an hour?
12:33:46 <bexelbie> paragan, funding speakers is a perfectly valid use of APAC funding
12:34:11 <bexelbie> suggesting that we only fund speakers going to international non-region conferences is an exageration that will generate bad responses from people who only read that
12:34:19 <paragan> bexelbie, well I took opposite from what you wrote in ticket
12:34:24 <sumantro> pjp we shoul
12:34:28 <Amita> pjp, can you please leave a comment in the ticket with final decision, thanks
12:34:37 <pjp> sumantro: Okay,
12:35:06 <pjp> #topic Split APAC Treasurer and Credit Card Holder Roles -> https://pagure.io/ambassadors-apac/issue/276
12:36:39 <sumantro> pjp this was on you, I remember voting in on this since long
12:36:47 <bexelbie> paragan, either I misspoke, you misinterpreted or we had a traditional good communication gap and we can work together to fix it :)
12:37:06 <bexelbie> paragan, We have the privilege of being people separated by a common language, to paraphrase Mark Twain
12:37:45 <bexelbie> for this one I am just looking for no serious objections to moving forward.  Getting a card issued is not a fast process, so I don't want to start it and discover you all wanted me to try for someone else
12:37:46 <pjp> bexelbie: You want start on #276 ?
12:37:52 <paragan> bexelbie, hm maybe I got you wrong. Sure we can fix the gap in future discussions :)
12:38:00 <bexelbie> paragan, yes :)
12:38:05 <bexelbie> pjp, yes, see above (we timed together)
12:38:14 <pjp> :)
12:38:57 <bexelbie> so given the nubmer of votes, are there any objections to pjp and woohuiren as mentioned in the ticket?
12:38:59 <pjp> Please vote on ticket #276, if you are okay/not okay with me handling book-keeping for APAC and Huiren Woo holding the Credit Card.
12:39:09 <pravins> pjones: lets have quick discussion, since few members already here and still in meeting :)
12:39:46 <GIANT_CRAB> Hi
12:40:16 <pjp> GIANT_CRAB: Hi
12:40:26 <Amita> pjp, so this can't be done by same person
12:40:41 <pjp> Amita: It can, but that's more work
12:40:43 <Amita> I mean traditionally we have two people for these two things
12:40:52 <Amita> ?
12:40:55 <Amita> pjp, ok
12:41:15 <Amita> I am +1 for the decision, but I was just thinking to swap the roles
12:41:24 <Amita> pjp, as cardholder
12:41:31 <bexelbie> Amita, these are the roles they self-selected
12:41:34 <bexelbie> why should we swap them?
12:41:37 <pjp> Having two people also helps with spread of APAC financial knowledge,
12:41:54 <Amita> I am little concerned about the reimbursements ..that is it
12:42:02 <pjp> Amita: I'm interesting in book-keeping,
12:42:07 <bexelbie> Amita, why do you have concerns with Woo Huiren making reimbursements?
12:42:10 <Amita> woohuiren is in the meeting?
12:42:15 <GIANT_CRAB> Yes im here
12:42:19 <pjp> Amita: that's GIANT_CRAB :)
12:42:20 <Amita> oh well, ok
12:42:25 <Amita> right
12:42:30 <Amita> :)
12:42:36 <bexelbie> Amita, what is the concern?
12:42:36 <pjp> GIANT_CRAB: Maybe your nick could be GIANT_CRAB(Huiren) ;)
12:42:59 <Amita> GIANT_CRAB, you are well aware of the whole process
12:43:08 <tnzchok> i am +1 on pjp and woohuiren as mentioned in ticket.
12:43:12 <Amita> I mean doing reimbursements
12:43:13 <pravins> i am fine, if GIANT_CRAB is making reimbursements. Its always good to have 2 different person doing it, double check.
12:43:28 <bexelbie> Amita, training can and is provided
12:43:33 <Amita> cool
12:43:36 <bexelbie> what is your concern that makes you want to get a different card holder?
12:43:40 <Amita> +1 left in the ticket
12:43:52 * bexelbie is not aware of pjp having any more knowledge in that area at this time
12:43:54 <Amita> bexelbie, just that..
12:44:01 <bexelbie> Amita, what?
12:44:05 <Amita> it should be on time
12:44:05 <bexelbie> you suggested a swap, why?
12:44:22 <bexelbie> are you concerned that GIANT_CRAB isn't going to do things on time but that pjp will?
12:44:35 <Amita> I can chase pjp more easily
12:44:43 <Amita> :)
12:45:04 <Amita> I was thinking Huiren is not even in meeting, but I was wrong
12:45:10 <bexelbie> so with regard to timeliness in general I have this opinion, the card holder should set expectations.  We have the other card holders and the FCAIC as backups
12:45:11 <pjp> Amita: Heh, you can chase GIANT_CRAB too, :)
12:45:36 <Amita> pjp, I actually don't want to waste time in chasing, if some guidelines are shared
12:45:40 <Amita> on timelines
12:46:06 <bexelbie> Amita, I agree we need expectations properly set.  But that is a two-way street.  If people wait two weeks to file their event report they can't expect instant reimbursement from their delay
12:46:09 <tnzchok> pjp: maybe amita thinks its hard to chase a giant crab :P
12:46:12 <Amita> yeah GIANT_CRAB is nice.. now I remember meeting him once over dinner in SIngapore
12:46:19 <Amita> tnzchok, lol
12:46:33 <Amita> bexelbie, I agree
12:46:47 <bexelbie> are there any -1s or concerns left?
12:46:57 <bexelbie> do we have enough votes or should we put this to email?
12:47:06 <Amita> I did a +1
12:47:21 <Amita> I think we have enough +1s
12:47:24 <Amita> and no -1
12:47:25 <pjp> Please add votes(+1/-1) to ticket #276
12:47:39 <tnzchok> i think we have 3 +1 and no -1
12:47:40 <Amita> 3 = +1s
12:47:42 <Amita> yes
12:48:20 <sumantro> I already voted +1
12:48:36 <pravins> great, happy we able to resolve this long standing ticket.
12:48:44 <pjp> True
12:48:45 <pravins> Thanks pjp and all for meeting.
12:48:57 <GIANT_CRAB> Thank you
12:49:03 <pjp> pravins: Thank you for participating. :)
12:49:10 <pjp> Thank you all for participating.
12:49:23 <bexelbie> ty everyone
12:49:24 <pjp> #action pravins to start a thread about APAC budget planning
12:49:38 <pjp> #action pjp to update ticket and learn about book-keeping
12:49:58 <pjp> Are we good to go? Anything for open floor ?
12:50:11 <pjp> #topic open floor
12:50:31 <pjp> Going...1
12:51:17 <pjp> Going...2
12:51:24 <pravins> sure pjp i will do.
12:51:44 <pjp> pravins: Thank you.
12:51:53 <pjp> Going...3
12:51:57 <pjp> #endmeeting