During the last meeting [1], we were discussing about the current
status of the weekly meetings, and we conclude that we need the input
of more people. So:
1. Timetable? We concluded that it wouldn't require to debate that,
as we have already discussed and tried several different
timetables. But just to confirm that.
2. We still need weekly meeting? In some way this is somewhat a
overkill, and it is clear that due the timetable, there are some
meetings really empty. But, in the same way, if we made that
bi-weekly, due the timetable some people will just attend one
meeting per month.
3. Current format: perhaps the more problematic point on the
meeting. Some people felt that the current format is too detailed,
and that we should orient the meeting to an agenda-item-update.
So, lets debate.
Opinions? Debate?
I will use this mail to share my personal opinions.
1. Ok for me
2. I think that worths the weekly meeting.
3. I personally pointed on the previous meeting that the reason this
wouldn't work is that nobody is editing the shared weekly meeting
and proposing items. So if we find a meeting with just 2 items, we
have two options. Or a 10 minutes agenda-item-update a11y meeting,
or just use the time to talk about it, as, after all, we were there
to talk about it, and enter into detail if required.
YES, probably a agenda-item-update oriented a11y meeting will be
better. Problem: there aren't enough items on the agenda for that.
BR
[1] http://live.gnome.org/Accessibility/Minutes/20100902
===
API (apinhe...@igalia.com)
_______________________________________________
gnome-accessibility-list mailing list
gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
