17:00:18 <cwickert> #startmeeting FAmSCo 2012-09-24
17:00:18 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Sep 24 17:00:18 2012 UTC.  The chair is cwickert. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:18 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:29 <cwickert> #meetingname famsco
17:00:29 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'famsco'
17:00:55 <cwickert> #chair cwickert rbergeron nb aeperezt
17:00:55 <zodbot> Current chairs: aeperezt cwickert nb rbergeron
17:01:09 <aeperezt> .fas aeperezt
17:01:09 <zodbot> aeperezt: aeperezt 'Alejandro Perez' <alejandro.perez.torres@gmail.com>
17:01:31 <cwickert> #topic Roll call
17:01:35 <cwickert> .fas cwickert
17:01:36 <zodbot> cwickert: cwickert 'Christoph Wickert' <christoph.wickert@googlemail.com>
17:01:37 <sesivany> .fas eischmann
17:01:39 <zodbot> sesivany: eischmann 'Jiri Eischmann' <eischmann@redhat.com>
17:01:42 <cwickert> #chair sesivany
17:01:42 <zodbot> Current chairs: aeperezt cwickert nb rbergeron sesivany
17:01:55 <cwickert> #chair danielbruno
17:01:55 <zodbot> Current chairs: aeperezt cwickert danielbruno nb rbergeron sesivany
17:02:10 * nb here
17:02:13 <rbergeron> sorry, I was in the old channel like a nerd.
17:02:13 <nb> .fas nick@bebout
17:02:14 <zodbot> nb: nb 'Nick Bebout' <nick@bebout.net>
17:02:24 <danielbruno> .fas dbruno
17:02:25 <zodbot> danielbruno: dbruno 'Daniel Bruno' <danielbrunos@gmail.com>
17:02:26 * cwickert is looking for herlo and bckurera
17:02:44 * sesivany apologizes that he can't pay full attention today, but will be around and follow.
17:03:47 <cwickert> #info 5 FAmSCo members present: aeperezt, cwickert, danielbruno, nb, sesivany
17:04:03 <cwickert> info and our very special fearless FPL rbergeron
17:04:07 <cwickert> #info and our very special fearless FPL rbergeron
17:04:24 <rbergeron> lol
17:04:29 <nb> :)
17:04:57 <cwickert> #info meeting agenda is at https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/report/9
17:05:01 <nb> #info herlo sends regrets
17:05:16 <cwickert> yupp, just seen it
17:05:38 <cwickert> #topic Budget budget budget
17:05:59 <cwickert> so, what has happened since last week? I sent a mail listing all problems I see
17:06:05 <cwickert> and there were some responses
17:06:29 <cwickert> who has not yet replied to this mail?
17:06:48 <danielbruno> i didn't
17:07:11 * rbergeron made some progress on the draftbudget until she locked it into needing a reboot this morning, which reminds her to ask someone wiht access if they can "reboot" it, and will do that now.
17:07:54 <cwickert> nb, danielbruno: did you read that mail?
17:08:01 <misc> rbergeron: reboot what ?
17:08:12 <nb> rbergeron, what kind of changes do you want? remove the old trac and recreate it
17:08:14 <nb> ?
17:08:33 <danielbruno> my apologizes, the last 10 days was so hard.. in my town there were two cyclones
17:08:39 * rbergeron also has a request for someone to package http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/PrivateCommentPlugin - then we could have private comments where people list their wire transfer or travel info or etc. but not close the entire ticket to view, I think
17:09:08 * cwickert thinks we should not look into technical details at this point
17:09:08 <nb> yes i read it
17:09:18 <rbergeron> nb: no, hang on - Error
17:09:18 <rbergeron> TracError: The Trac Environment needs to be upgraded.
17:09:19 <rbergeron> Run "trac-admin /srv/web/trac/projects/draftbudget upgrade"
17:09:30 <nb> rbergeron, one min
17:09:39 <rbergeron> cwickert: the front page of the wiki has some workflow listed.
17:09:51 <danielbruno> cwickert, nop
17:09:55 <rbergeron> but you can't actually see it right now becuase I apparently clicked 2 buttons at once.
17:09:57 <cwickert> rbergeron: "the workflow"?
17:10:04 <cwickert> who designed that workflow?
17:10:25 <nb> [root@hosted01 ~]# trac-admin /srv/web/trac/projects/draftbudget upgrade
17:10:25 <nb> Upgrade done.
17:10:25 <nb> You may want to upgrade the Trac documentation now by running:
17:10:25 <nb> trac-admin /srv/web/trac/projects/draftbudget wiki upgrade
17:10:26 <rbergeron> cwickert: the draft of "if we use trac to keep a general list of accounting"
17:10:56 <rbergeron> ie: if this, then enter on this line. if Y, then enter on another line.
17:10:58 <nb> i did the wiki one too
17:11:30 <rbergeron> cwickert: ie: what I said I would do last week.
17:11:56 <cwickert> do we want to talk about my mail?
17:12:28 <sesivany> cwickert: I'd leave for mailing list discussion.
17:12:43 <sesivany> cwickert: too broad topic to discuss it here.
17:13:07 <cwickert> so what do we actually want to talk about?
17:13:36 * rbergeron thinks maybe setting some deadlines around the discussion would be good.
17:13:41 <cwickert> +1
17:13:53 <rbergeron> or high level "what we vaguely need to accomplish by when"
17:14:08 <sesivany> +1
17:14:09 <rbergeron> and if there is anything that can be identified as hackfest material for FUdcon Paris we might identify that as well.
17:14:33 <rbergeron> Things that just need cleanup and not necessarily "it's all broken and we don't know where to start" kind of stuff. :)
17:14:48 <sesivany> rbergeron: will suehle attend FUDCon Paris?
17:14:55 <cwickert> look, we are FAmSCo, we are to make decisions, otherwise there is not much to hack at Paris
17:16:49 <rbergeron> sesivany: yes. leslie hawthorn as well
17:17:13 <rbergeron> cwickert: okay, so what can we decide before Paris so we can actually do things F2F
17:17:31 <cwickert> I made a suggestion how to move on
17:17:37 <cwickert> I gave clear instructions
17:17:41 <cwickert> but nobody replied
17:17:45 <cwickert> this is just frustrating
17:18:10 <cwickert> 1. do we agree the list of problems is complete?
17:18:21 <rbergeron> Then if nobody replies in the next few days, move on according to your plan. :)
17:19:32 * cwickert waits for somebody to say something
17:20:09 <sesivany> 1. yeah, I think all problems have been pretty much said there.
17:20:31 <rbergeron> though I think it's possible we'll find others, so ... flexibililty/understanding and all that
17:22:12 <nb> +1
17:22:23 <cwickert> that +1 was for what exactly?
17:24:33 <cwickert> ok, here is my suggestion
17:24:41 * rbergeron listens
17:24:44 <cwickert> either somebody else runs this meeting or we just close it
17:25:00 <cwickert> because we are not making any progress and we are not even talking to each other
17:25:12 <cwickert> anybody volunteers to chair this meeting?
17:26:07 <rbergeron> this particular instance?
17:26:10 <rbergeron> or this meeting forever :)
17:26:21 <cwickert> this meeting
17:26:29 <cwickert> how about rotating chairs?
17:26:41 <sesivany> cwickert: there apparently won't be any discussion today :-/
17:26:51 <rbergeron> cwickert: I think that's a fair thing to do, in general.
17:27:05 <sesivany> cwickert: if there are 3 people active.
17:27:06 <cwickert> sesivany: well, there hardly was any discussion on the mailing list either
17:27:21 <rbergeron> Though someone will have to be doing reminders as well.
17:28:23 * nb thinks we already discussed and decided on the approval process
17:28:28 <nb> which is one part of the budget issues
17:28:48 <cwickert> nb: so, what does it look like?
17:29:10 <nb> 0-500 peer review 500-1999 community, 2000+ famsco (and redhat po)
17:29:14 <nb> i thought?
17:29:22 <nb> and the 0-2000 levels can be adjusted by the regions
17:29:29 <cwickert> well, then herlo said it would be counterproductive
17:30:09 <sesivany> cwickert: AFAIK he +1'd at the meeting where we agreed on it.
17:30:28 <cwickert> sesivany: yes, but he revoked it in the ticket
17:30:28 * aeperezt think we are running in circles
17:30:48 <cwickert> nb: what expenses in NA do not conform to the limits we set?
17:31:16 <nb> i think just media?
17:31:24 <cwickert> herlo said something else
17:31:42 <nb> tshirts or something maybe? although i really wasn't involved in the last time they were ordered
17:31:43 <nb> so i am not sure
17:31:54 <cwickert> quote herlo: "after long discussions with some folks in NA region, it
17:31:54 <cwickert> seemed that many of the things that were restricted by the new rules
17:31:54 <cwickert> would regularly be violated because it was already being done and not
17:31:54 <cwickert> being approved "
17:32:06 <sesivany> cwickert: there was just one objection: that repetitive expenses can be approved just once. That was all.
17:32:07 <cwickert> I wonder if he is the only one to think so
17:32:16 <cwickert> sesivany: in NA?
17:32:25 <nb> well, we never got approval from famsco for media before
17:32:47 <nb> we just had max/robyn make a po
17:32:55 <sesivany> cwickert: in general, but this objection came from NA. But I have no big problem with that.
17:33:00 <nb> but i am not really opposed to getting approval for media
17:33:40 <cwickert> sesivany: who stated that concern?
17:33:43 <nb> although its basically approx the same amount of expense every release, so it would probably be a "repetitive expense"
17:33:57 <sesivany> nb: if it's two requests a year I think it's no biggy.
17:34:03 <nb> sesivany, yeah
17:34:21 <sesivany> cwickert: I'm not sure, but I think it was herlo.
17:34:28 <cwickert> hold on: what exactly is the problem with repetitive expenses and what was the propsal?
17:34:57 <cwickert> sesivany: in the NA meeting, in our meeting or on the mailing list?
17:35:45 <sesivany> cwickert: the proposal was that if an expense is approved as repetitive it needs to be approved just once.
17:36:03 <cwickert> sesivany: who made that propsal where?
17:36:17 <sesivany> cwickert: in FAmSCo meeting, when we agreed on the approval rules.
17:36:47 * cwickert will look it up
17:37:08 <nb> and one more question, did we decide that you could or couldn't approve your own stuff?
17:37:22 <nb> i.e. now, if i need to buy shipping supplies or something, i just do it and send the receipts in to get reimubrsed
17:37:44 <sesivany> cwickert: herlo was supposed to make the final version of the approval guidelines based on that meeting (including that objection). But is hasn't happened yet AFAIK.
17:37:47 <nb> or for fudcon, i got a few things printed for the gpg and cacert events, i didn't ask for approval, i just asked robyn to go pay for it
17:37:49 <cwickert> nb: we said that the CC holder can pre-approve stuff or people
17:38:24 <nb> ok
17:38:27 <rbergeron> and can't people just go pay for things and ask for reimbursement under a certain amount?
17:38:31 <cwickert> nb: basically John can say: "I know this fellow is shipping stuff and I trust him to do the right thing, just have him send me the receipts and I'll pay it"
17:38:57 <rbergeron> provided it follows guidelines that are reasonable (shipping, pizza for a LUG meeting if there is a report, etc)
17:39:11 <nb> rbergeron, as far as i understand the new rules, only if a cc holder or famsco members says they can
17:39:30 <nb> although i kinda think they should be able to
17:39:56 <sesivany> rbergeron: everyone is not a good idea. There is a peer review which I think is flexible enough for this.
17:40:01 <nb> well true
17:40:20 <nb> plus peer review can basically just say "i trust you to not do bad things"
17:40:26 <cwickert> +1
17:41:08 <rbergeron> Or peer review could mean, you spent the money and now one of the CC holders isn't going to reimburse you because you didn't justify your purchase or weren't responsible ...
17:41:13 <rbergeron> but, okay
17:41:16 <cwickert> I know that Jörg trusts and reimburses me, nevertheless I should not go out for dinner for USD 499 every other week :=
17:41:42 <nb> :)
17:41:50 <cwickert> rbergeron: you see, this is a new problem
17:41:59 <cwickert> I think we should move this to the wiki
17:42:15 <cwickert> because I an not sure everybody will read the full meeting logs
17:42:56 <cwickert> so, how about that: last call for feedback on my mail till Friday
17:42:57 <rbergeron> cwickert: i agree.
17:43:05 <rbergeron> maybe we should summarize the agreedupon points we just made
17:43:07 <cwickert> over the weekend I'll move everything to the wiki
17:43:10 <rbergeron> or what we think was agreed?
17:43:27 <cwickert> that is the list of problems and what we have agreed on so far
17:43:42 <cwickert> and then we tackle the remaining problems in small teams
17:43:45 <cwickert> or per ticket
17:44:01 <cwickert> each team needs to do their homework
17:44:09 <cwickert> otherwise there is not much sense meeting
17:44:33 <cwickert> does that sound like a plan?
17:44:40 * sesivany is not very happy that the approval thing is discussed again and again. We were discussing it for months, then we finally agreed on that and now we're back again while there are more difficult problems ahead such as reimbursement, budget planning etc.
17:45:28 <aeperezt> sesivany, +1
17:45:45 <nb> sesivany, a big +1
17:46:14 <cwickert> we never agreed on "the approval" thing, we only agreed on limits
17:46:20 <cwickert> and one of us didn't
17:46:34 <cwickert> "the approval thing" would be way more than just limits
17:46:58 <cwickert> currently we have 4 different people/groups/workflows to approve
17:48:26 <sesivany> cwickert: why? why do we have to agree what regions decides to do? We give them boundaries and let them decide whatever they want within them.
17:48:54 <cwickert> that means what exactly?
17:49:17 * cwickert is not sure if sesivany and he are talking about the same thing
17:49:41 <cwickert> sesivany: when I talk about the status quo with the 4 different ways, I am not talking about the limits
17:49:51 <cwickert> but about http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Community_credit_card_process
17:51:16 <sesivany> cwickert: ok, what's not clear about approving?
17:52:04 <sesivany> cwickert: because I already introduced EMEA ambassadors to the new rules and we're following it and we haven't identified any serious problems.
17:52:16 <cwickert> fine with me
17:52:25 <cwickert> but it seems that NA has problems
17:52:30 <cwickert> at least herlo says so
17:52:49 <cwickert> and it is not clear to me what you mean with "boundaries"
17:53:32 <sesivany> cwickert: what about letting them come up with suggestions how to improve it? because I still don't see what problems they have (not saying there are none).
17:53:47 <cwickert> I don't see them either
17:54:05 <cwickert> that's why I suggested to NOT continue this discussion here
17:54:16 <cwickert> as the person who had concerns is not here with us
17:54:26 <sesivany> cwickert: ok, that's right.
17:54:46 <cwickert> lets make a final call and if there are no objections by Friday we'll go with what we have agreed on so far
17:54:56 <cwickert> but again, it's basically just limits
17:55:00 <sesivany> cwickert: +1
17:55:06 <nb> FAmNA T-Shirts (300) 		2011-Aug-22 	Screen Printed Products 	2130.42 USD 	2011-Sep-16
17:55:12 <nb> was the last time we ordered shirts i think
17:55:19 <nb> according to john's cc report
17:55:37 <cwickert> nb: where is it?
17:55:54 <cwickert> can you please add that info to ticket #281?
17:56:05 <nb> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Inode0/community_credit_card_report
17:56:06 <nb> yeah
17:56:32 <cwickert> #action nb to add info on NA community credit card report to #281, cwickert to do the same for EMEA
17:58:14 <cwickert> #info last call for feedback on cwickert's budget mail of last week. Please make sure the list of problems is complete and if you have objections, state them on famsco list before the weekend
17:58:31 <cwickert> #info otherwise we'll go with what we have and work from there
17:58:49 <cwickert> ok, I need to leave now
17:59:03 <cwickert> anything else before I close the meeting?
17:59:17 <sesivany> not from me
17:59:59 * rbergeron has nothing else
18:00:07 <cwickert> #endmeeting