From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LXfMY-0001kW-O3 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:28:34 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 24AE1E04C1; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:28:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2E67E04C1 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:28:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (xray.science.oregonstate.edu [128.193.220.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C4C06772C; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:28:33 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 09:28:33 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz To: Ciaran McCreesh Cc: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009 Message-ID: <20090212172833.GC3652@comet> References: <1234257125.18160.2016.camel@localhost> <20090210212518.GD3692@comet> <1234421593.20307.22.camel@localhost> <20090212155056.GA3642@comet> <20090212155506.3bf4c8f2@snowcone> <20090212160114.GC3642@comet> <20090212161222.2cb62b5e@snowcone> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1ccMZA6j1vT5UqiK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090212161222.2cb62b5e@snowcone> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Archives-Salt: 10e82fab-336f-4aec-87b6-051dfb48953e X-Archives-Hash: f94a901b805ac7f16e631332cc5bcad6 --1ccMZA6j1vT5UqiK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 16:12 Thu 12 Feb , Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > I suggest a preliminary agenda gets sent out a week before the=20 > meeting. Afterwards, Council members make sure they've read up on=20 > everything, asked all their questions and posted initial opinions at=20 > least three days in advance. Then, assuming satisfactory answers to=20 > all of the above, a decision can be reached in the meeting with little=20 > discussion -- and going over one hour shall not put a stop to it. >=20 > To make sure this happens, I suggest that any Council member who does=20 > not post their preliminary opinion (which can include a list of=20 > questions that they consider unaddressed, and which can change as new=20 > information becomes available) at least two days before the meeting is=20 > counted as not being at the meeting for slacker purposes. I like pretty much all of this. My only problem continues to be meeting=20 length. The current meeting time falls in the middle of the workday in the US,=20 so long meetings aren't an option for at least Mark and me. I think Mark=20 intends to send out a rescheduling note soon to see if we can fix that,=20 but our evenings are horrible for the Europeans, etc. That's just another reason why I'd like to push things onto the lists to=20 the point where we could even drop live meetings entirely and simply=20 have deadlines instead. It sometimes seems like the main purpose of=20 meetings is to allow people to bring up last-minute objections. --=20 Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com --1ccMZA6j1vT5UqiK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkmUXEEACgkQXVaO67S1rtsTigCcCrNEuBJ38pEWSuMiDEOBDf1y DaQAnA185l3K2zigL/g2ofaoliDdmIqY =ocSa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1ccMZA6j1vT5UqiK--