On Oct 14, 2014, at 6:00 PM, Lance Bragstad <lbrags...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Christopher Yeoh <cbky...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 10:29:34 -0500 > Lance Bragstad <lbrags...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I found a couple of free times available for a weekly meeting if > > people are interested: > > > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/128332/2 > > > > Not sure if a meeting time has been hashed out already or not, and if > > it has I'll change the patch accordingly. If not, we can iterate on > > possible meeting times in the review if needed. This was to just get > > the ball rolling if we want a weekly meeting. I proposed one review > > for Thursdays at 2100 and a second patch set for 2000, UTC. That can > > easily change, but those were two times that didn't conflict with the > > existing meeting schedules in #openstack-meeting. > > So UTC 2000 is 7am Sydney, 5am Tokyo and 4am Beijing time which is > pretty early in the day. I'd suggest UTC 0000 if that's not too late for > others who'd like to participate. > > Chris > > Unfortunately, we conflict with the I18N Team Meeting at UTC 0000 (in > #openstack-meeting). I updated the review for UTC 1000. An alternating > schedule would probably work well given the attendance from different times > zones. I'll snoop around for another meeting time to alternate with, unless > someone has one in mind. Don’t forget about #openstack-meeting-alt and #openstack-meeting-3 as alternative rooms for the meetings. Those have the meeting bot and are managed on the same wiki page for scheduling. Doug > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 3:55 AM, Thierry Carrez > > <thie...@openstack.org> wrote: > > > > > Jay Pipes wrote: > > > > On 10/13/2014 07:11 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > > > >> I guess we could also start fleshing out in the repo how we'll > > > >> work in practice too (eg once the document is stable what > > > >> process do we have for making changes - two +2's is probably not > > > >> adequate for something like this). > > > > > > > > We can make it work exactly like the openstack/governance repo, > > > > where ttx has the only ability to +2/+W approve a patch for > > > > merging, and he tallies a majority vote from the TC members, who > > > > vote -1 or +1 on a proposed patch. > > > > > > > > Instead of ttx, though, we can have an API working group lead > > > > selected from the set of folks currently listed as committed to > > > > the effort? > > > > > > Yes, the working group should select a "chair" who would fill the > > > same role I do for the TC (organize meetings, push agenda, tally > > > votes on reviews, etc.) > > > > > > That would be very helpful in keeping that diverse group on track. > > > Now you just need some volunteer :) > > > > > > -- > > > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
