---- On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 22:16:36 +0900 Julia Kreger <juliaashleykre...@gmail.com> wrote ---- > +1 to bringing back formal meetings. A few replies below regarding > time/agenda. > > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 5:38 AM Doug Hellmann <d...@doughellmann.com> wrote: > Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> writes: > > > Ghanshyam Mann wrote: > >> ---- On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 02:47:53 +0900 Jeremy Stanley > <fu...@yuggoth.org> wrote ---- > >> > On 2018-10-04 13:40:05 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: > >> > [...] > >> > > TC members, please reply to this thread and indicate if you would > >> > > find meeting at 1300 UTC on the first Thursday of every month > >> > > acceptable, and of course include any other comments you might > >> > > have (including alternate times). > >> > > >> > This time is acceptable to me. As long as we ensure that community > >> > feedback continues more frequently in IRC and on the ML (for example > >> > by making it clear that this meeting is expressly *not* for that) > >> > then I'm fine with resuming formal meetings. > >> > >> +1. Time works fine for me, Thanks for considering the APAC TZ. > >> > >> I agree that we should keep encouraging the usual discussion in > existing office hours, IRC or ML. I will be definitely able to attend other > 2 office hours (Tuesday and Wednesday) which are suitable for my TZ. > > > > 1300 UTC is obviously good for me, but once we are off DST that will > > mean 5am for our Pacific Time people (do we have any left ?). > > > > Maybe 1400 UTC would be a better trade-off? > > Julia is out west, but I think not all the way to PST. > > My home time zone is PST. It would be awesome if we could hold the meeting > an hour later, but I can get up early in the morning once a month. If we > choose to meet more regularly, then a one hour later start would be more > appreciated if it is not too much of an inconvenience to APAC TC members. > That being said, I do typically get up early, just not 0500 early that > often.
One hour later (1400 UTC) also works for me. -gmann > > Regarding frequency, I agree with mnaser that once per month might be > > too rare. That means only 5-ish meetings for a given a 6-month > > membership. But that can work if we use the meeting as a formal progress > > status checkpoint, rather than a way to discuss complex topics. > > I think we can definitely manage the agenda to minimize the number of > complex discussions. If that proves to be too hard, I wouldn't mind > meeting more often, but there does seem to be a lot of support for > preferring other venues for those conversations. > > > +1 I think there is a point where we need to recognize there is a time and > place for everything, and some of those long running complex conversations > might not be well suited for what would essentially be "review business > status" meetings. If we have any clue that something is going to be a very > long and drawn out discussion, then I feel like we should make an effort to > schedule individually. > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
