Hi,
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 09:19:52AM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> As this keeps causing confusion, and there is very little rationale
> for binding our meeting time to UTC (given that we are all on the
> Northern hemisphere), can we agree to always have the meeting at 21:00
> London time?
We tie
On 11/13/2012 04:20 AM, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 09:19:52AM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> As this keeps causing confusion, and there is very little rationale
>> for binding our meeting time to UTC (given that we are all on the
>> Northern hemisphere), can we agree to always have
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 09:19:52AM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> As this keeps causing confusion, and there is very little rationale
> for binding our meeting time to UTC (given that we are all on the
> Northern hemisphere), can we agree to always have the meeting at 21:00
> London time?
I have no p
2012/11/13 Martin Pitt :
> As this keeps causing confusion, and there is very little rationale
> for binding our meeting time to UTC (given that we are all on the
> Northern hemisphere), can we agree to always have the meeting at 21:00
> London time?
21:00 London time is fine with me.
--
Soren H
Hello TB,
sorry for missing the meeting yesterday. I thought we agreed to move
the meeting one hour earlier during DST only. It seems we switched
between three different time slots now, and at least for me we keep
between switching between "impossible" and "really inconvenient".
As this keeps cau
